Brown, Hussey & Erith v. Howard
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari, to the justice’s court in the city of x* xr r * JV 67V-1 OTIC• The defendant in error brought an action, in the court below, against the plaintiffs in error, for an assault and battery and false imprisonment on the high seas, on board she ship Tea-plant, on a voyage from Liverpool to Mem-York.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari, to the justice’s court in the city of x* xr r * JV 67V-1 OTIC• The defendant in error brought an action, in the court below, against the plaintiffs in error, for an assault and battery and false imprisonment on the high seas, on board she ship Tea-plant, on a voyage from Liverpool to Mem-York. Brown, the master of the ship, pleaded not guilty, and son assault demesne, and the other two defendants, who were mates on board of the same vessel, pleaded not guilty, and justified that they acted by the orders of Brown, the master. At the tria| in the court below, which was…
1Opinion of the Court
Thompson, Ch. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court. The question arising upon this return is, whether the court.below ought to have admitted, as witnesses, Hussey and Erith, two of the defendants, and who were offered by the other defendant. There can be no doubt that in actions for torts, a defendant, against whom no evidence has been produced, may be examined as a witness for his co-defendant.: But the rule laid down in the books on this question is, that if there is any, even the -slightest, evidence, against him, he cannot be discharged as a party, and received as a witness. The want of…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Cubit v. O'DettMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Hood v. MathisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
- Fox v. JacksonNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Hambleton v. McGeeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1862
- Breen v. HydeMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.