Chance v. Hine
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of ejectment, tried at New-Haven, August term, 1825, before Hosmer, Ch. J. The plaintiff, to establish his title to the demanded premises, offered one George Munn as a witness. The defendant objected to his competency, on the ground that the suit was prosecuted for Munns benefit, and that he was interested in the event of it; and the defendant adduced testimony to that point.
Read the full summary
This was an action of ejectment, tried at New-Haven, August term, 1825, before Hosmer, Ch. J. The plaintiff, to establish his title to the demanded premises, offered one George Munn as a witness. The defendant objected to his competency, on the ground that the suit was prosecuted for Munns benefit, and that he was interested in the event of it; and the defendant adduced testimony to that point. After hearing it, the court found, that Munns interest in the event of the suit, was not proved; and he was admitted to testify. The counsel for the defendant then proposed to make the same enquiry of…
1Opinion of the CourtLanman, J.
I am quite satisfied, that the decision, at the trial, was right, both as to the law and the practice on the point in controversy; and I could hardly have supposed, that at so late a day, the proposition would have been doubted. As a general rule of evidence, when a witness is offered in a cause, and an objection is raised against him, it is incumbent on the party fishing to exclude him, before he testifies, to show his incompetency : for every witness offered is presumed to be competent, until the contrary appears. The reason of this rule is obvious, as it tends to save time, and so to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hamblett v. HamblettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- Ward v. BroadwellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1854
- Atwood v. WeltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828