Sehorn v. . Williams
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action on the case for a deceit and false waRRANty, tried before ITeath, J., at the Special Term, (June, 1859,) of Ashe Superior Court. There were but two questions made for the Supreme Court: First. The defendant, after exhausting all his peremptory challeges, proposed to challenge Peter McNeal, who Second.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case for a deceit and false waRRANty, tried before ITeath, J., at the Special Term, (June, 1859,) of Ashe Superior Court. There were but two questions made for the Supreme Court: First. The defendant, after exhausting all his peremptory challeges, proposed to challenge Peter McNeal, who Second. The defendant also offered to read the deposition of one Swearingen, taken out of the county, as to the character of John W. Sehorn, who was one of the principal witnesses for tlie plaintiff, as to- the terms of tlie contract, and to the alleged deceit. The plaintiff objected…
1Opinion of the CourtRuffiN, J.
The statute which authorises the clerk to pass on depositions, and makes those allowed by him legal evidence, only applies to depositions of competent witnesses. Objections, therefore, remain ojien on the score of incompetency ; and that is fatal to the deposition in this case. It was taken out of the county under a commission, not under seal, while the statute in that case requires a seal. The commissioner, who took it, bad, therefore, no authority to take it, or administer an oath to the witness ; and consequently, the oath was extrajudicial, and the witness could not be convicted of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Butler v. Greensboro Fire & Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Baker v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1864