Legal Opinion

Williams v. Chadbourne

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1856PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the^ljfjfteenth Judicial District, County of Trinity. -jU / ■ The plaintiff brought his action in assumpsit for $1462 15, for goods, wares and merchandise, sold and delivered, and for moneys lent and advanced to defendant. __ The defendant denied the indebtedness, and averred^jfchat" plaintiff was indebted to him in the sum of $3000, for various services, and the one-half of certain property owned by the parties in common.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the^ljfjfteenth Judicial District, County of Trinity. -jU / ■ The plaintiff brought his action in assumpsit for $1462 15, for goods, wares and merchandise, sold and delivered, and for moneys lent and advanced to defendant. __ The defendant denied the indebtedness, and averred^jfchat" plaintiff was indebted to him in the sum of $3000, for various services, and the one-half of certain property owned by the parties in common. The evidence shows that the parties contracted together to erect a saw mill, the plaintiff to furnish the money, and the defendant to…

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Murray

Mr. Justice Terry concurred.

The first error relied on by the appellant is the exclusion of the deposition of E. H. Stone. Its introduction was objected to on two grounds, first, that it was taken before the County Clerk, and not the County Judge, as specified in the notice to the defendant; and, second, that it was not certified by the Clerk that said deposition had been read to the witness before signing thereof.

The first objection, we think, untenable. The statute does not require that the noticie should specify the officer before whom the deposition is to be taken, and public convenience…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. People v. MorineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Darby v. HeagertyIdaho Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Day v. ClokeNevada Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Lucas v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Andresen v. Upham Manufacturing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API