Ex parte Dement
Supreme Court of Alabama
Application for eertiorari, &c., showing the following state of facts: One Kit Barnard was on trial in the circuit court of Madison, on a charge of mm’der. Dr. J. J. Dement, the petitioner, was introduced as a witness for the State, the solicitor stating that he desired to examine him as an expert.
Read the full summary
Application for eertiorari, &c., showing the following state of facts: One Kit Barnard was on trial in the circuit court of Madison, on a charge of mm’der. Dr. J. J. Dement, the petitioner, was introduced as a witness for the State, the solicitor stating that he desired to examine him as an expert. After testifying that he was a physician and had seen the deceased after he had received the wounds which the prosecution asserted had produced death, he was asked to state the nature and character of the wound received, and its probable effect. This, Dr. Dement declined to do, upon the ground that…
1Opinion of the CourtManning, J.
The question presented in this cause is whether a physician is punishable as for a contempt for refusing to testify as an expert, without being paid for his testimony as for a professional opinion.
In Best’s “Principles of the Law of Evidence,” a philosophic English treatise (the 6th London edition of which was issued last year, and has been recently published in this country), he says: “The law allows no excuse for withholding evidence which is relevant to the matters in question before its tribunals, and is not protected from disclosure by some principle of legal policy. A person, therefore,…
2Cited by24 opinions
- City & County of San Francisco v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Ex parte DickensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- People Ex Rel. Kraushaar Bros. & Co. v. ThorpeNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- Ex parte SteeleDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1908
- Dixon v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.