Scott v. Jones
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of Tuskaloosa. This was an action of assumpsit by the plaintiff in error, against •the defendants, joint owners and proprietors of the steam-boat Warrior, to recover damages for the failure of them to deliver in Mobile, according to contract, one hundred bales of cotton, -ship-ed on board that boat at Tuskaloosa.
Read the full summary
Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of Tuskaloosa. This was an action of assumpsit by the plaintiff in error, against •the defendants, joint owners and proprietors of the steam-boat Warrior, to recover damages for the failure of them to deliver in Mobile, according to contract, one hundred bales of cotton, -ship-ed on board that boat at Tuskaloosa. The defendants pleaded non-assumpsit, but the case being called for trial, the defendant Hammond, appeared in court and asked leave to withdraw his plea and defence, which was allowed, “ and thereupon a judgment by default, was taken against him.”…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
In several of the States, a party to the record is excluded as a witness, upon the ground, that his admission is opposed to policy. [See 2 Phil. Ev. C, & H’s notes, 134, *6965, 6; 3 Id. 1550.] But it is said, it may now be regarded as settled in the English, and in a majority of the American courts, that the exclusion of a party, whether nominal or real, or both, from being a witness in his own cause, rests mainly on the ground of interest. [3 Phil. Ev. C. & H's notes, 1563.] In Willings et al v. Coosegna, [1 Peters’ C. C. Rep.] Mr. Justice Washington says: “ The general rule certainly is, that a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bohun v. CollinsNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Bostwick v. LewisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1802
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dumas & Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Aicardi v. Strang, Murray & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1862
- Turner v. LazarusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844
- Gooden v. Morrow & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1845