Campbell v. Woodcock
Supreme Court of Alabama
This cause comes up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of Mobile. The plaintiffs in error declared against the defendant in assumpsit, to recover the amount of a promissory note, as also for goods, wares and merchandise, sold and delivered &c. The cause was tried by a jury as on an issue, although there is no plea shewn by the record.
Read the full summary
This cause comes up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of Mobile. The plaintiffs in error declared against the defendant in assumpsit, to recover the amount of a promissory note, as also for goods, wares and merchandise, sold and delivered &c. The cause was tried by a jury as on an issue, although there is no plea shewn by the record. On the trial, the plaintiff excepted to a decision of the presiding judge, which excluded from the jury a deposition taken at their instance. The objection to the deposition was, that it was not taken by a commissioner duly appointed for that purpose. The…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
— .The deposition which was excluded at the trial, was attempted to be taken under the fourth section of the act of December, 1837 — “To regulate the compensation of fitnesses in civil cases, and for other purposes,” [Pamphlet Acts, 1837, p. 26.] That section provides that “ when any witness, whose evidence may be wanted in any cause depending in either the Circuit or County Court of any county of this State, shall live more than one hundred miles from the place where the Court may be held, in which such cause may be pending, the party desiring the benefit of the evidence of such witness,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Kirk v. SuttleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844