Young v. Adm'rs of McLemore
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Tallapoosa. THIS was an action of assumpsit, commenced in the Court below, by the intestate of the defendants in error, against the plaintiffin error. Whilst the cause was pending, the plaintiff filed interrogatories, under the act passed in 1837, to provide more effectually for discoveries in suits at common law, which the defendant was called on to answer.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Tallapoosa. THIS was an action of assumpsit, commenced in the Court below, by the intestate of the defendants in error, against the plaintiffin error. Whilst the cause was pending, the plaintiff filed interrogatories, under the act passed in 1837, to provide more effectually for discoveries in suits at common law, which the defendant was called on to answer. The plaintiff’s attorney having made affidavit that the evidence of the defendant was material to the trial of the cause, the Court, on motion, made an order that the defendant file his answer to the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The questions of law, arising in this case, grow out of a statute passed 23d December, 1837, the design of which, was to supersede the necessity of resorting to chancery, to obtain a discovery of facts, resting in the knowledge of a party to the suit. The act requires the Court to be satisfied of the materiality of the testimony sought to be obtained by “ the oath of the party filing the same or otherwise” and it would be strange, if greater credence should be given to the oath of an interested party,- than to that of an unbiased witness. It might indeed be questioned, whether any oath was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Allen v. Lathrop-Hatton Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1890