Case Name: Serlested's case
Court: United States Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1793
Citations: 1 Mart. 202
Docket Number: 
Parties: Serlested’s case.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 202–202

Head Matter:
Serlested’s case.
Trin. 3. Car
HE was indicted for cozenage eo quod one Proud, existens miles sub one Hammond, his captain, &c. Serlested, pretending that he had power to dischacge soldiers, took of the said Proud, as well for discharging him, &c.
The first exception was that it is said existens miles, without saying how, or where. But it was held well enough.

Opinion:
Whitlock, J.
It is well enough under the statute 11 H. 7.
2. It is said, he pretended to have power to discharge soldiers; which is impossible, for it appears by the statute that he had no such power: but the captain or general has. Therefore the indictment is bad.
Curia. It is this, that makes the deceit. He pretending to have a power, which he had not.
3. It is said that he did not discharge him at tunc et ibidem, viz. the time and place where the money was taken; perhaps he discharged him at some other time.
Curia, pleads this, if yon please. The indictment is well enough.