Gordon v. Clapp
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the County Court of Montgomery, Tried before the Hon. David Campbell. This action was brought by Charles .A.- G^ipp, againisi' John W. Gordon, to recover the sum of-$604, alleged t© be “ due on account between plaintiff and.-defendant on the 1st January, 1860, and for work and labor.,.done, and materials furnished, by plaintiff for defendant.”' - On the trial, as the -bill of exceptions states, the plaintiff proved the performance of the work for which…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court of Montgomery, Tried before the Hon. David Campbell. This action was brought by Charles .A.- G^ipp, againisi' John W. Gordon, to recover the sum of-$604, alleged t© be “ due on account between plaintiff and.-defendant on the 1st January, 1860, and for work and labor.,.done, and materials furnished, by plaintiff for defendant.”' - On the trial, as the -bill of exceptions states, the plaintiff proved the performance of the work for which compensation was claimed; and the defendant, having introduced evidence tending to show that the work was done on a.house which…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
We are not informed on what principle the plaintiff was permitted to prove his own declaration, made in the absence of the defendant, to the effect -“that he would not do the work under the contract with Barnard, but that he looked to the defendant individually for his pay.” The general rule is,, that a party’s ex-parte statements cannot become evidence for himself. To that rule there are exceptions, one of which is, that what a party says, contemporaneously with an act done, and explanatory of its nature, may be given in evidence as part of the res gestae. To bring a case within this rule,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sanford v. HowardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1857
3Cited by2 opinions
- Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. v. Adams, Rowe & NormanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Brand v. AbbottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868