PROFERT IN CURIA (Lat. he produces in court: sometimes written profert in curi um, with the same meaning). In Pleading. A declamation on the record that a party pro duces inicourt the. deed under which he makes title. , In ancient bract:ice, the deed itself 1,1zally prochiced ; in modern times, the only is made in the declaration, an e 1 eed is then constructively in posses *k court; 6 M. & G. 277; Tucker v. Pri , Md. - NM 3z''' ' • Germain v. Wilgus, 67 ' 1 4 .1 14 C. C. A. 561. °fen. is, in general, necessary when ei party pleads a deed and claims rights r it whether plaintiff ; Patten V. Hens , 1 _(_, N. J. L. 293; or defendant ; Duncan v. e As. 17 Ark. 279; to enable the court ln ns; and construe the instrument plead i , and 40 entitle the adverse party to over thereof; 10 Co. 92 b; 1 Chitty, Pl. 414; Andr. Steph. PI, 160; and is not necessary when the party' pleads it without making tifikun der it ; P1. c. 7, p. 2, § 47. But a par ty Who actually or presumptively uuabl to iia a deed may plead it without profert, $s in suit by a stranger ; Corn. Dig. Pleader,. 8; Cro. Jac. 217; Cro. Car. 441, or one chiming title b operation of law ; (o. Litt. 225 ; Bac. 4.br; Pleas (I 12) ; 5 Co. 75; or where the coed is in the posses sion of the adverse part, 4 or is lost. In all
these cases the special faci* be shown, to excuse the want'. of See Gould, Pl. c. 8, p. 2 ; Lawes, Pl. 90 ; 1 Saund. 9 a. Profert of a patent can'be mane by'refer ence to the letters patent or to a certified copy thereof ; Heaton Peninsular B. F. Co. v. Schlochtermeyer, 69 Fed. 592. The profert of any recorded instrument, as letters pat ent, is equivalent to annexing a copy ; Amer ican Bell Tel. Co. v. Tel. Co., 34 Fed. 803.
Profert and over are abolished in England' by the Common Law Procedure Act, 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76; and a provision exists, 14 & 15 Vict. c. 99, for allowing inspection of all doc uments in the possession or under the con trol of the party against whom the inspec tion is asked. See 25 E. L. & E. 304. In many of the states profert has been abolish ed, and in some instances the instrument must be set forth in the pleading of the par ty relying upon it. The operation of profert and oyer, where allowed, is to make the deed a part of the pleadings of the party producing it ; Tucker v. State, 11 Md. 322.
See PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; LOST IN STRUMENT.