Legal Opinion

In re McCraven

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided December 12, 1916PublishedCited by 11 opinions

On application for a commission to take testimony,, de bene esse.

1Opinion of the Court

IValkeS, Chancellor.

The petitioner applies to take testimony de bene esse, on commission, of two witnesses residing ont of the state, under the . provision of the Evidence act. (Gen. Stat. p. 2217 § 36 et seq. There is no proof of the materiality of the witnesses named, as required by section 36, except, perhaps, as that may be gathered from'the interrogatories'propounded, which'are annexed to the form of commission. Some of the interrogatories are incompetent.

The absent witness, Mrs. McCraven, mother of the alleged idiot, is asked about her son, and, among others, this question: “How long…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Shutka v. Pennsylvania RR Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
  2. Estate of Nicolas v. Ocean Plaza Condominium Ass'n, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2006
  3. Prickett v. AllardNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974
  4. Brown v. BrownNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
  5. Cooper v. CooperNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API