Claiborne v. Parrish
Court of Appeals of Virginia
This was an ejectment brought in the County Court of New-Kent for 200 acres of land. Verdict, that the defendant was guilty as to 155 acres of the land. The judgment was entered for the 150 acres of land in the declaration mentioned.
Read the full summary
This was an ejectment brought in the County Court of New-Kent for 200 acres of land. Verdict, that the defendant was guilty as to 155 acres of the land. The judgment was entered for the 150 acres of land in the declaration mentioned. At the trial, the defendant tendered a bill of exceptions which was sealed, stating, ‘‘that the plaintiff offered I. H. as a witness, one of the persons said to be a juryman on the execution of the writ of ad quod damnum, who was questioned by the plaintiff as to-what he had heard William Parrish, one of the chain carriers on the survey made pursuant to the said…
1ConcurrenceFleming, J.
Concurred.
The PRESIDENT.- — In every view of this subject, I think the evidence was improperly admitted. It has been well observed, that in some instances hearsay evidence may be proper, where from the nature of the case it is not to be expected that better testimony could be procured. Such as where the transaction is ancient, and in others which have been mentioned. It was upon this principle, that the case of Jenkins and Tom (ante vol. 1. p. 123) was determined.
But how do the reasons which authorise the admission of hearsay evidence apply to this case. The writ of ad quod damnum is only IV…
2Cases cited215 opinions
- Philadelphia & Trenton Railroad v. StimpsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Temple v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1881
- Kerr v. LunsfordWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- State v. GreerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
- Brotton v. LangertWashington Supreme Court · 1890
210 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.