Clements v. Marston
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, by Charles W. Clements against Weare Marston, on an. account annexed for boarding the defendant, labor, &c., between April 1 and July 17,1869. The defendant has died since the commencement of the suit, and bis administrator defends, and said administrator did not elect to testify.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, by Charles W. Clements against Weare Marston, on an. account annexed for boarding the defendant, labor, &c., between April 1 and July 17,1869. The defendant has died since the commencement of the suit, and bis administrator defends, and said administrator did not elect to testify. Against the defendant’s objection, the wife of tlie plaintiff was admitted, and sworn as a witness for the plaintiff, generally, in the cause, and her testimony related to matters witliin the knowledge of the deceased, and concerning which he might have testified. Said wife was permitted to testify to…
1Opinion of the CourtSargent, J.
At common law, a party to a cause could not testify, on the ground that he was interested. Any person not a party, if interested in the result' of the suit, was excluded as a witness on the ground of interest. Wives were excluded, — 1st, on the ground of interest, they being interested wherever their husbands were; and 2d, upon the ground of public policy, that it was not expedient to place husband and wife in a position that might lead to dissensions and strife between them, or that might encourage perjury. Hence, wives were not allowed to testify for or against their husbands when they were…
2Cited by8 opinions
- State v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1992
- Kansas City Life Ins. Co. v. JonesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1937
- Day v. DaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876
- Key Bank v. LatshawSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1993
- United States v. BanksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.