Hill v. Barney
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, upon a note dated April 19, 1884, made payable by the defendant to the plaintiff, or order, with interest, for $67.50. There was also a count for money bad and received. The plaintiff offered the attorney who made the writ as a witness to prove that the note was lost, and to show its contents.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, upon a note dated April 19, 1884, made payable by the defendant to the plaintiff, or order, with interest, for $67.50. There was also a count for money bad and received. The plaintiff offered the attorney who made the writ as a witness to prove that the note was lost, and to show its contents. To the competency of this evidence the defendant objected, on the ground that the witness was liable to the plaintiff for the loss of the note, it having been left with him for collection; but the court overruled the objection. The witness then testified that the plaintiff left with him a…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The evidence of the loss of the instrument declared on was addressed to the court, and the *609objection that the witness was interested cannot avail, so far as the testimony went to show the loss, for that reason. A party may prove the loss of the instrument.
The existence of the instrument, as a ground of action against the defendant, is a matter for the consideration of the jury, after the evidence of the loss has entitled the plaintiff to introduce secondary evidence; and upon the trial of that question the ordinary rules in relation to the interest of witnesses apply.
This distinction between…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Irvine v. Lumbermen's BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Marwick v. Georgia Lumber Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Owen v. WestonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885