Horton v. . Green
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Action for False warranty and Deceit, in the sale of a mule, tried before Mitchell, J., at Eall Term 1869, of Caldwell Court.
Read the full summary
Action for False warranty and Deceit, in the sale of a mule, tried before Mitchell, J., at Eall Term 1869, of Caldwell Court. It was alleged by tbe plaintiff that the mule had glanders, when sold; and among other witnesses introduced was Dr. Bivers, a physician of eleven years standing, who being asked by the plaintiff whether from his general knowledge of diseases he could tell whether the symptoms in this case indicated that the disease was of recent standing or not; answered: that he had no particular acquaintance with diseases of stock, but from his books, observation and general…
1Opinion of the Court
Peabsoít, C. J.
If tbe subject bad been a man, instead of a mule, without donbt tbe opinion of' Dr. Bivers as to whether a disease, the symptoms of which be bad observed, was of recent or of long standing, would bave been competent evidence. State v. Clark, 12 Ire. 151. Our question is, does tbe fact that tbe subject was a mule, make this rule of evidence inapplicable. Becurrence to the principles on which tbe rule rests, will show that it appbes to tbe one case as well as to tbe other, and that there is no distinction in regard to tbe competency of tbe evidence, though it may betbat in tbe…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Yates v. . YatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- State v. . SheetsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
- State v. . BoyleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889