Thompson v. Morin
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for goods sold. Trial by jury and verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff put in evidence the deposition of one Greet. Subject to exception the defendants upon proof of Greet’s signature were permitted to introduce as evidence a statement purporting to be signed by him which they claimed contradicted the deposition in a material matter. Transferred from the March term, 1920, of the superior court by Marble, J.
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, C. J.
“It is competent for a party to impeach the testimony of a witness by proof of his-declarations out of court which are inconsistent with his testimony as to material matters. ... In this state it is not necessary to lay a foundation for such evidence by inquiring of the witness upon cross-examination whether he has made the declarations of which it is proposed to offer proof.” Villineuve v. Railway, 73 N. H. 250, 251; Tabor v. Judd, 62 N. H. 288, 292. The decision in Villineuve v. Railway, supra, is not authority for the proposition that a written statement cannot be put in evidence unless…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Villineuve v. Manchester Street RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
- Monroe v. Connecticut River Lumber Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
- Tabor v. JuddSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882
3Cited by1 opinion
- California Products, Inc. v. Puretex Lemon Juice, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1960