McRae v. Holcomb
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Nevada Circuit Court. Hon. L. A. Byrne, Circuit Judge. All that portion of Powers’ evidence as to conversation and transactions between him and deceased comes within the rule of exclusion in Const. 1874, schedule, sec. 2. Not witihin the letter, but within its spirit and meaning. Powers was directly interested and as much a party to the suit as if his name bad appeared in the record as such.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Nevada Circuit Court. Hon. L. A. Byrne, Circuit Judge. All that portion of Powers’ evidence as to conversation and transactions between him and deceased comes within the rule of exclusion in Const. 1874, schedule, sec. 2. Not witihin the letter, but within its spirit and meaning. Powers was directly interested and as much a party to the suit as if his name bad appeared in the record as such. The judgment for appellee is, in effect, a judgment for Powers, in that it releases him from obligation. Powers was a competent witness. He was not a party, and the proviso in Const., sec. 2,…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This appeal is from a judgment rendered in favor of Holcomb against McRae as administrator of John A. Crossland. The action was upon a promissory note, made by the deceased and alleged to have been lost or mislaid. Hpon the trial, one Powers, not a party to the action, was introduced as a witness for the plaintiff and was permitted, against the objection of the defendant, to give evidence of sundry transactions and conversations had with Crossland, touching the matter in controversy. The ground of the objection was that Crossland was dead, and that the witness was interested in the issue to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. DicksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
- Potter v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Looker v. DavisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Blood v. FairbanksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Bragg v. ClarkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Towson v. DensonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- United States v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1911
- Lucky v. Equity Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
- Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. D'AlemberteSupreme Court of Florida · 1897
- Brewer v. RustSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.