Hudson v. Crow
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Benton. Tried before tbe Hon. Anbubw B. Mooes. Assumpsit, on the common money counts, by Daniel Crow against Samuel P. Hudson, “ to recover the proceeds of a note which plaintiff placed in defendant’s hands for collection, executed by Williamson Williams, for $665 52, and dated on the 15th March, 1841.” The only plea was the general issue, with leave to give any matter in evidence which might be pleaded in bar. ■ On the trial, the plaintiff…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Benton. Tried before tbe Hon. Anbubw B. Mooes. Assumpsit, on the common money counts, by Daniel Crow against Samuel P. Hudson, “ to recover the proceeds of a note which plaintiff placed in defendant’s hands for collection, executed by Williamson Williams, for $665 52, and dated on the 15th March, 1841.” The only plea was the general issue, with leave to give any matter in evidence which might be pleaded in bar. ■ On the trial, the plaintiff read in evidence a receipt, sighed by S. P. Hudson & Go., of which the following is a copy:— “ Received of Daniel Crow…
1Opinion of the CourtChilton, C. J.
—The court below did not err in refusing' to exclude the deposition of Williams, conceding that he was an interested witness; for it is not permitted to a party, knowing of a witness’ interest, to allow his adversary to go on and examine him by deposition, raising no objection on *522the ground of interest;' thus enabling himself to read the deposition, if it should prove beneficial to his side of the case, but, in the event it should prove detrimental to him, then for the first time to spring the objection at the trial and exclude it. The rule which usually obtains, of not allowing questions to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hair v. LittleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
- Travelers' Ins. Co. v. WhitmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Leslie v. SimsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
- Drake v. FosterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856