Low v. Blodgett
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated April 3d, 1847, for two hundred dollars, payable to the plaintiff or order, in one year, with interest, signed by said Blodgett, and by said Eaton as his surety. The writ was dated September 25, 1848. Blodgett defended the action on the ground that the debt had been paid by Eaton, after the suit was brought, and before the action was entered; and he called, as a witness, Abraham Bean, the officer who served the writ.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated April 3d, 1847, for two hundred dollars, payable to the plaintiff or order, in one year, with interest, signed by said Blodgett, and by said Eaton as his surety. The writ was dated September 25, 1848. Blodgett defended the action on the ground that the debt had been paid by Eaton, after the suit was brought, and before the action was entered; and he called, as a witness, Abraham Bean, the officer who served the writ. The counsel for the plaintiff objected to his being sworn, on the ground that after the action was brought and the writ served by said Bean…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The attorney who appeared in this case in behalf of the plaintiff, objected that Bean was not to be sworn as a witness in the cause, upon the ground, that although he was not a party to the record, yet he was the real plaintiff in the action. And in proof of that fact he gave in evidence an assignment of the note to recover which the action was brought, and of the action itself, to Bean. The objection is to be regarded as made on behalf of ^3ean himself. The question, upon this branch of the case, is whether the ruling of the court, requiring the witness to testify in the cause, was correct.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Winship v. the Bank of the United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1831
- Appleton v. BoydMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Robinson v. LeavittSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- Sparks v. Steamer "Kate French"Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1861
- Woodman v. EastmanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1839
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. Boston & Berlin Transportation Co.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1964