Howell v. Reynolds
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of Error to the County Court of Dallas. Assumpsit by the plaintiff in error. The declaration contains the common counts, and an account stated. Pleas — Non-assumpsit, and the statute of limitations.
Read the full summary
Writ of Error to the County Court of Dallas. Assumpsit by the plaintiff in error. The declaration contains the common counts, and an account stated. Pleas — Non-assumpsit, and the statute of limitations. The plaintiff proved, that in the fall of 1841, the account sued on was presented to the defendant, at which time he said he would take the account, and do what was right about it; and by another witness, that in 1842, he promised to pay it, if plaintiff would give him a small credit for corn, . Upon the account there was a credit for corn, and the defendant did not offer to prove any amount,…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The rule of evidence relied on to justify the exclusion of the affidavit of Bonneau, to contradict his testimony, is the rule established by the judges in the Qneen’s case, and which has been frequently held to be the law, by this court — that a witness cannot be impeached by proof of counter declarations made by him, without first asking him whether he has made such declarations. The reason of the rule is, that it may be in his power to explain the apparent *131contradiction, and the rule is the same, whether the declaration of the witness supposed to contradict his testimony, be written or…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Powell v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
- Edwards v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1966
- Doe ex dem. Hughes v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
- Samuels v. GriffithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
- Brown v. GillettWashington Supreme Court · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.