Did you notice...

[Reese]

At 11:16 PM 3/21/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
 >
 >That the one place 'common law' is mentioned in the Constitution it is in
 >direct conflict with contemporanious English common law?
 >
 >                                Amendment VII
 >
 >In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
 >dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by
 >a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States,
 >than according to the rules of the common law.

It acknowledges the existence of common law.  Now that this has been cleared
up, your contention is that the US is not bound by, and does not follow ANY
of the precepts of English common law, is that correct?

Proceeding on the assumption of the affirmative (dangerous, but the electrons
are already paid for), where is the American common law that replaced the
now rejected English common law, that A7 refers to?

Reese