Legal Opinion

Crews v. Crews

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided November 16, 1931No. 8406PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

The first headnote does not require elaboration.

Under the ruling in Hill v. Merritt, 146 Ga. 307 (91 S. E. 204), the testimony which can not be admitted where one of the parties is deceased must concern a “transaction or communication had directly with the deceased, . . of such character that the deceased, if alive, could deny, rebut, or explain the statement of the other party.” It is well settled that where one of the parties to a transaction is dead, the surviving party may testify as to some facts and not as to others," the admissible evidence depending upon whether it falls within the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dowdy v. Watson & LewisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Chamblee v. PirkleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  3. Hill v. MerrittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  4. Moore v. Harlan & HollingsworthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1868
  5. Leaptrot v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1868

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Grant v. Fourth Nat. Bank of ColumbusSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
  2. Miller v. EverettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  3. Cole v. ThrasherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  4. Columbus Bank & Trust Co. v. DempseyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
  5. Sumter County v. PritchettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971

5 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