Lovelock Lands, Inc. v. Lovelock Land & Development Co.
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By the Court,
Sanders, J.:
The defendant in this case has appealed from an adverse judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. Many errors are assigned, but, as we view the record, we need dispose of but two.
We will first dispose of the contention that the trial judge erred in permitting testimony to be given by one Wooster concerning transactions with F. M. Lee and W. C. Noteware, who represented the defendant company, since both of said witnesses are dead.
Section 5419, Rev. Laws, provides: “No person shall be allowed to testify; 1. When the other party to the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- LIFE AND FIRE INS. COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. Wilson's HeirsSupreme Court of the United States · 1834
- Wilson v. California Central RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- People ex rel. Hambel v. McConnellIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Ohms v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- Baker v. BairdMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hough v. Reserve Gold Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1934
- Lovelock Lands Inc. v. Lovelock Land & Development Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1931
- Lovelock Lands Inc. v. Lovelock Land & Development Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1931