Trustees of Lansingburg v. Willard
New York Supreme Court
IN error, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. The plaintiffs in error brought an action, before the justice, against the defendant, to recover certaih penalties incurre4 by violating a by-law of the village of Lansinífburi?, in releasing and rescuing certain geese from the pound, and from persons driving them to pound# The defendant pleaded not guilty, and there was a . • , . trial by jury, tiffs, and being challenged, on his voire dire, answered- ' ° 0 that he was…
Read the full summary
IN error, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. The plaintiffs in error brought an action, before the justice, against the defendant, to recover certaih penalties incurre4 by violating a by-law of the village of Lansinífburi?, in releasing and rescuing certain geese from the pound, and from persons driving them to pound# The defendant pleaded not guilty, and there was a . • , . trial by jury, tiffs, and being challenged, on his voire dire, answered- ' ° 0 that he was interested in the event of the cause; and, , e e to explain how he was interested, said, that a long timfc before this suit,…
1Per curiam
There existed no possible interest in ■ this case. It was merely ideal, if not an artifice to avoid giving evidence. The supposed interest was against the party insisting on the examination of the witness.
Peake (156.) seems to think that an interest existing merely in the imagination of a witness, is not sufficient to reject him. But there are several cases (1 Str. 129. 12 Vin. 11. pl. 28.) in which it has been held, that if a witness apprehends himself to be interested, though stricto jure he is not, he cannot be sworn.
*429To prevent fraud and trick, the following appears to be a salutary…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Williams v. MatthewsNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Burroughs v. United StatesU.S. Circuit Court for New York · 1856
- State ex rel. Bishop v. PoteetSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1847