Tinnin v. Garrett
Mississippi Supreme Court
In error, from the Madison circuit court. This was an action of debt, on a bond, in the penalty of $20,000, with conditions, brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiifs in error. Neither the bond nor conditions are set out in the record. Yarious errors are assigned; the one upon which the case was decided, is the only one it is deemed necessary to notice.
Read the full summary
In error, from the Madison circuit court. This was an action of debt, on a bond, in the penalty of $20,000, with conditions, brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiifs in error. Neither the bond nor conditions are set out in the record. Yarious errors are assigned; the one upon which the case was decided, is the only one it is deemed necessary to notice. That was the refusal of the court below to permit Phineas M. Garrett, a witness on the part of the defendants, to answer the following question, propounded by the defendants’ counsel, to wit: “Do you know, whether the plaintiff…
1Per curiam
The defendant in error brought this action on a bond, with condition. The defendants pleaded payment, and the plaintiff took issue, and assigned breaches in his replication. Although oyer was craved, the bond and condition are not set out, and we cannot, therefore, know whether the breaches are well assigned or not. No further notice was taken of them, and the trial was had on the plea of payment.
The question presented by the first bill of exceptions, is the only one we deem it necessary to notice.
The defendants called a witness, and asked him this question, “ Do you know whether the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Edgerton v. PageNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1857
- West Side Savings Bank v. NewtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- West Side Savings Bank v. NewtonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1877
- Edgerton v. PageNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1856