Glover v. Gentry
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jackson. Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbko. ' This action was-brought by the appellant Samuel H. Glover, against the appellees, J. L. Gentry and C. B, Moore, as administrators of the estate of William Mo.ore, deceased, and counted upon a promissory note for $1,250 alleged to have been executed by William Moore,' the defendant’s intestate, bearing date July 9, 1888. The complaint also contained a count upon an open account, and another one…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jackson. Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbko. ' This action was-brought by the appellant Samuel H. Glover, against the appellees, J. L. Gentry and C. B, Moore, as administrators of the estate of William Mo.ore, deceased, and counted upon a promissory note for $1,250 alleged to have been executed by William Moore,' the defendant’s intestate, bearing date July 9, 1888. The complaint also contained a count upon an open account, and another one for money loaned by plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant pleaded in short, by consent, non assumpsit; payment; set…
1Opinion of the CourtHead, J.
The testimony of Mrs. Glover and her husband, the plaintiff, touching her competency to testity to transactions had between her husband and the deceased, Moore, is different from that contained in the record when the case was before us on a former appeal, but we think it still establishes her incompetency. The statute (Acts, 1890-91, p. 557) excludes any one having a pecuniary interest in the result of the suit. ' The language is broad enough to include any pecuniary interest, absolute or contingent; and it further provides that no person who is an incompetent witness under the act shall make…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Cooke v. WilbanksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932