Wallace v. Blanchard
Superior Court of New Hampshire
In this case, the issue joined between the plaintiff and The trustee was, whether The latter had in his hands any goods, effects, or credits, of Daniel Hopkins. This issue was t ried hce at October term, 1825, when the plaintiff called the said Hopkins, who had been defaulted, as a witness, to maintain the said issue on his part.
Read the full summary
In this case, the issue joined between the plaintiff and The trustee was, whether The latter had in his hands any goods, effects, or credits, of Daniel Hopkins. This issue was t ried hce at October term, 1825, when the plaintiff called the said Hopkins, who had been defaulted, as a witness, to maintain the said issue on his part. The trustee objected to his admission as a witness, on the ground of interest ; whereupon a release, made by Wallace, in the followsng words, was produced and proved. "■ Know nil men by these presents, that I Royal Wallacet u of Milford &c. do for myself. &c. forever…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Richardsok. C. J.
We shall, in the first place, examine the question,whether Daniel Hopkins was a competent witness for the plaintiff, in this case.
The general rule is, that no party to an action can be examined as a witness, without the consent of all the parties to the record. This is the rule, laid down in Mant vs. Mainwaring, 8 Taunt. 139; where, in an action against several defendants, upon a special agreement, it was necessary to prove the partnership of all the defendants ; and the plaintiff gave to one of the defendants, who had been defaulted,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Whiting v. CochranMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- People v. BillNew York Supreme Court · 1813
3Cited by4 opinions
- Kittredge v. EmersonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844
- Averill v. MathesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Bell v. JonesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1845
- Vaughan v. MorrisonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875