Corbin v. Adams
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action to recover for work performed by the plaintiff’s son for the defendant, according to an account annexed to the writ. The defendant specified in his defence, under the general issue, a contract between him and the plaintiff, that the son should work for him a certain period, and a breach of the contract, by the son’s leaving his service before the expiration of the agreed time.
Read the full summary
This was an action to recover for work performed by the plaintiff’s son for the defendant, according to an account annexed to the writ. The defendant specified in his defence, under the general issue, a contract between him and the plaintiff, that the son should work for him a certain period, and a breach of the contract, by the son’s leaving his service before the expiration of the agreed time. At the trial, before Mellen, J., in the court of common pleas, the plaintiff called the son as a witness, who testified, among other things, that he performed the labor as stated in the account ; that…
1Opinion of the CourtWilde, J.
The only question in this case is, whether the declarations of the plaintiff’s agent were competent evidence to prove a contract between the parties; and we are of the opinion that they were not, as was ruled at the trial. That the declarations of an agent, acting within the limits of his appointment, made in the course of the transaction which is the subject of inquiry, are admissible in evidence, cannot be doubted. Such declarations are considered as part of the res gestee, and are admitted as original evidence, and not as hearsay testimony. And certainly what an agent says, when making a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. GoodingSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Sundry Goods, Wares & Merchandises v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hammersmith v. AveryNevada Supreme Court · 1884
- State v. Nevada Central RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1905