A Treatise on the Competency and Rights of Witnesses and Parties in Interest in All Actions or Proceedings Before Courts or Magistrates; With American and English Decisions

A Treatise on the Competency and Rights of Witnesses and Parties in Interest in All Actions or Proceedings Before Courts or Magistrates; With American and English Decisions

By (author) 

List price: US$19.74

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1897 edition. Excerpt: ...Myer v. Hunt, 38 St. Rep. 739; 14 Supp. 471. Nor can the vendor of goods testify, in an action to recover their price, that he has never been paid for them. Braymen v. Stephens, 79 Hun, 28. Also, in an action against an executor, where a demand for services rendered to deceased was set up as a counterclaim, the plaintiffs were not allowed to answer the question, " Was it true it all had been paid? " Williams v. Davis, 7 Civ. Pro. 282. In an action for money had and received by the defendant's intestate, where the defense was that the money had been placed in the hands of the deceased for the purpose of defrauding the plaintifi"s creditors, it was held that he could not testify in his own behalf that he had not given the deceased the money for that purpose. Tooley v. Bacon, 8 Hun, 76; aff'd 70 N. Y. 34. See Hard v. Ashley, 117 N. Y. 606; rev'g 53 Hun, 112. In an action to avoid a deed as to part of certain premises, it was held that the defendant could not be asked if he had stated that if the deed included the fifteen acres he would correct the mistake made by the deceased grantor. Mills v. Mills, 8 Supp. 811. Where the mere fact that a party has had a conversation with a deceased person, to whom the opposite party stands in the relation specified in the section, is amaterial question, it is not competent for such party to testify that he had the conversation. Maverick v. Marvel, 90 N. Y. 656. In an action to foreclose an equitable lien for unpaid purchase money of land sold by the plaintiffs father since deceased, the contract for which was assigned to the defendant by his deceased father, and the defense was payment, and the defendant testified to admissions made by the plaintifi that he had received...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 84 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 4mm | 168g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 123676112X
  • 9781236761125