Saunders v. Duval
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John H. Eeagan. Suit by appellee’s intestate against appellant, on account of partnership transactions from December 1st, 1853, to December 1st, 1854, in a saw and grist mill and a ferry and farm in connection therewith. The parties were joint owners of the property; the plaintiff furnished three hands and the defendant two.
Read the full summary
Error from Anderson. Tried below before the Hon. John H. Eeagan. Suit by appellee’s intestate against appellant, on account of partnership transactions from December 1st, 1853, to December 1st, 1854, in a saw and grist mill and a ferry and farm in connection therewith. The parties were joint owners of the property; the plaintiff furnished three hands and the defendant two. The plaintiff lived at Palestine, twenty-five miles off; and defendant resided on the property, and managed the business. The issues were as to the state of the accounts, and whether or not the business had yielded any…
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The objection to the competency of the witness Duval, was not well taken. He had no certain interest in the event of the suit. Though he had been appointed executor and had qualified, he had been removed from the office, and was not then in possession of it. The most that can be said is, that he may have had a right to it; but whether he would ever hold it was uncertain. It must be a present, certain and vested interest, and not an interest uncertain, remote or contingent, to render a witness incompetent. (1 Greenl. Ev. Sec. 390, 408.) It is clear that the witness had no such interest. He was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ellis v. RandleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- Austin v. ThomsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1863