Opinion
SEPTEMBER TERM, 1784.
Lewis and Mifflin for the plaintiff. — Sergeant for the defendant.
EJECTMENT. — On the trial of this cause, in deducing the plaintiffs' title, a sheriff's deed was produced, but no part of the record recited therein.
Sergeant contended, that if the title was set forth, it was necessary to prove every part of it; that between the parties, the Fi. fa. and Vend. Exp. may only be shewn; but that against a stranger, the pleadings, verdict, and judgment, ought to be produced. Gilb. L. of E. 9. 10.
On a question from the opposite counsel, Sergeant admitted that in New-Jersey, it was not the practice to produce more than the sheriff's deed; but insisted that, of late, it had been frequently required, and that in strictness, it was indispensibly necessary.
But, BY THE COURT: — As the possession has gone more than twenty years along with the deed, it is unnecessary, in this case, to require farther proof. And the CHIEF JUSTICE added, that within his knowledge, it had not been customary, in any case, to produce the record.