No. 3108. Book 4, tit. 8, chap. 11, sec. 3, § 3, div. 1, art. 3. No. 3111. been granted to certain persons is then entered in the book of records of the court. The letter of administration is in the nature of an exemplification of this record, and is received without other proof. It authorizes the grantee, called the administrator, to collect, manage, settle and administer the personal estate of the intestate; and, until repealed by lawful authority, the administrator is vested with all the power which the intestate had in the personal estate which he owned on the day of his death. Letters of administration are never granted, when the deceased left a will, except when the will is annexed to them. 2° of the manner of proving records and public documents. 3108. Records are proved by the mere production of the record, without more, or by copy. (1.) Of the production of the record itself. 3109. As a record is located in a particular place, and it cannot be removed, the record itself can be produced only when the cause is in the same court, whose record it is; or when it is subject to the proceedings of another court. (2.) Of proof of record by copy. 3110. Copies of records are of three kinds: 1, exemplifications; 2, copies made by an authorized officer; 3, sworn copies. 3111.-1. An exemplification is a perfect copy of a record, so far as relates to the matter in question, and certified as to its correctness, first under the great seal, or secondly, under the seal of the particular court where the record remains. (a) The term exemplification, in its strict legal sense, ought to be understood as synonymous with inspeximus, and as importing something beyond the ordinary certified copy (a) Bull. N. P. 227; 1 Gilb. Ev. by Lofft, 19; 3 Inst. 173; 1 Phil. Ev. 384, 385; 1 Greenl. Ev. 501. No. 3112. Book 4, tit. 8, chap. 11, sec. 3, § 3, div. 1, art. 3. No 3112. under seal.(a) When produced it is usually admitted, even upon an issue of nul tiel record, as sufficient evidence.(b) 3112.-2. Copies of a record made by an authorized officer, certified under the seal of the court, are in general received as evidence. It is not in such case required to prove the seal, for the courts recognize without proof the seal of state, and the seals of the superior courts of justice, and of all courts established by public statutes. In this country the courts do not seem to make any distinction between an exemplification and a certified copy under seal. But the certificate must be of the whole record, and not of a mere extract; (c) and when the certificate is, that it is a copy of the record, it will be presumed to be of the whole record.(d) An office copy of a record is a copy authenticated by an officer intrusted for that purpose; it is admitted in evidence upon the credit of the officer, without proof that it has been actually examined. (e) In the same court and in the same cause, an office copy is equivalent to the record, but in another court or in another cause, the copy must be proved; unless in those cases where it is made the duty of the officer to furnish copies; in this last case they are admitted in all courts under the same jurisdiction It It may be stated generally, that in the United States an officer (a) Page's case, 5 Co. 54. (b) Vail v. Smith, 4 Cowen, 71; Pepoon v. Jenkins, 2 John. Cas. 118. (c) Edmiston v. Schwartz, 13 S. & R. 135; Ingham v. Crary, 1 Pennsyl. 389. But see Rex v. Bellamy, Ry. & Mo. N. P. C. 174; Thompson v. Chauveau, 6 Mart. N. S. 458. (d) Voris v. Smith, 13 S. & R. 334. In several of the states, the form of these certificates is regulated by statute. See Vance v. Reardon, 2 N. & McC. 299; Thompson v. Chauveau, 6 Mart. N. S. 458; Commonwealth v. Phillips, 11 Pick. 28; Barry's Lessee v. Rhea, 1 Tenn. 345; Burton ". Pettibone, 5 Yerg. 443. A certificate that it appears to the officer that a judgment has been entered, etc., is insufficient. Wilcox v. Ray, 1 Hayw. 410. This form of certificate is technically called a constat. Co. Litt. 225; Page's case, 5 Co. 54. See McGuire v. Sayward, 9 Shep. 230. (e) 2 Phil. Ev. 131; B. N. P. 229. No. 3113. Book 4, tit. 8, chap. 11, sec. 3, § 3, div. 1, art. 3. No. 3115. having legal custody of the public records, is, ex officio, competent to certify copies of their contents. 3113.-3. An examined copy is one made by a witness who has compared the copy with the original. This comparison may be made by the witness himself, or by the witness and another person reading and comparing the two; but it is not necessary that the persons examining should exchange the papers, and read them both ways. (a) Proof by parol that such a copy was so made, and its production in court, accompanied with further evidence that the record from which the copy was taken was found in the proper place of deposit, or in the hands of the officer in whose custody the records are kept, is sufficient evidence of the record. 3114. When the record is lost and it is ancient, its existence and contents may sometimes be presumed; whether ancient or not, when it is proved to be lost, may be supplied by secondary evidence. it 3° Of the effect of a record when proved. 3115. When the record of a judgment has been established, in either of the modes above mentioned, it is conclusive between the parties and their privies, upon the same matter directly in question, in any other suit. It is a general principle that such decision is binding and conclusive upon all other courts of concurrent power. This principle pervades not only our own, but all other systems of jurisprudence, and has become a rule of universal law, founded on the soundest policy. It is the maxim that when once a thing has been adjudged, it shall be considered thereafter forever settled. Res judicata, say the civilians, facit ex albo nigrum, ex nigro album, ex curvo rectum, ex recto curvum.(b) (a) Lynde v. Judd, 3 Day, 499; Hill v. Packard, 5 Wend. 387; Winn v. Patterson, 9 Pet. 663; Fyson v. Kemp, 6 Car. & Pay. 71. (b) See Dig. 441, 2; 2 Kaimes, Eq. 367; 10 Toull. n. 65 et seq. No. 3116. Book 4, tit. 8, chap. 11, sec. 3, § 3, div. 1, art. 3. No. 3116. 3116. In order to give to a judgment the force of the res judicata, there must be a concurrence of the four conditions following, namely: 1. Identity in the thing sued for. 2. Identity in the cause of action; for example, I have claimed a right of way over Blackacre, and a final judgment has been rendered against me, because I could not establish such a right of way: afterward I purchase Blackacre, and, as owner, I bring a suit for its recovery; the first decision shall not bar my claim, when I sue as owner of the land, and not for an easement over it, as I did in the first suit, which I claimed as a right appurtenant to my land Whiteacre. 3. Identity or privity of parties and of persons to the action; this is a consequence of the rule of natural justice; ne inauditus condemnetur, that no man shall be condemned unheard. 4. Identity of the quality in the persons for and against whom the claim is made; for example, an action by Peter to recover a horse, and a final judgment against him, is no bar to an action by Peter, administrator of Paul, to recover the same horse. The constitution of the United States, and the amendments to it, declare that no fact, once tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reëxaminable in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. (a) Much discussion has taken place respecting the effect of a former recovery when different actions in tort have been brought, successively, in relation to the same chattel; for example, where an action of trespass is brought, and the defendant sets up a title to the chattel, and the issue is found for him; and the plaintiff afterward brings an action of trover for the same chattel, he is clearly barred, because the title to (a) Parsons v. Bedford, 3 Pet. 433. No. 3117. Book 4, tit. 8, chap. 11, sec. 3, § 3, div. 1, art. 3. No. 3118. it was settled in the first action.(a) In the like manner, a judgment in trover for the defendant, upon the merits, is a bar to an action for money had and received, for money arising from the sale of the same goods.(b) But whether a judgment obtained by the plaintiff in trespass, without satisfaction, is bar to an action of trover for the same chattel, is a point upon which different opinions have been entertained. (c) 3117. Proof of public documents, not records, when properly made, has the effect of establishing the existence of such documents. 4o of the nature and proof of foreign laws, records, and other public documents. (1) Of foreign laws. 3118. Courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws, they must be proved as facts, and when such laws come in question, the party who seeks advantage of them is required to produce an authenticated copy, for it is presumed all civilized governments will allow their officers to give authentic copies of their laws when requested. Before the party can offer any inferior evidence, he must prove such request and refusal; on its being shown that such a refusal has been made, other evidence of the existence of the law may be given. If an exemplification under the seal of the foreign state cannot be had, such laws must be verified by some high authority which the law respects not less than an oath, or by an oath or affirmation. Such a law may be proved to be a true copy by a witness who has compared and examined it with the original, or by a certificate of an officer properly authorized by (a) Putt v. Roster, 2 Mod. 218; Putt v. Rawstern, 3 Mod. 1. |