Angelowitz v. Nolet

The plaintiff contends that the Court erred in admitting the deposition of the defendant, since the latter was in court and testified at the trial. ESA 517:1, upon which the plaintiff mistakenly relies, relates to the depositions of witnesses, but section 11 of the same chapter, dealing with parties and which applies here, states that a party’s deposition may be used at the trial “unless the deponent is in attendance.”

Although it is true ordinarily that this defendant’s deposition would not have been admissible since he was in court (Hayward v. Barron, 38 N. H. 366), it could have been used…