Gates v. Johnston
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Huntingdon county. May 25. This was an issue directed by the court of Common Pleas, and formed to try, on the pleas of non assumpsit and payment, with leave to give the special matters in evidence, “ whether any, and, if any, what amount was due,” from James R. Johnston, the defendant in error and the defendant below, to Martin Gates, the plaintiff, at the time the defendant confessed judgment to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Huntingdon county. May 25. This was an issue directed by the court of Common Pleas, and formed to try, on the pleas of non assumpsit and payment, with leave to give the special matters in evidence, “ whether any, and, if any, what amount was due,” from James R. Johnston, the defendant in error and the defendant below, to Martin Gates, the plaintiff, at the time the defendant confessed judgment to the plaintiff. It appeared by the paper book, that on the 9th day of August, 1842, a judgment for $7631 25 was confessed by virtue of a warrant of attorney, and entered…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
Nothing contained in the bills of exceptions to evidence is worthy of particular examination, except the objection to the witness, Hewit, who, as a judgment creditor of the defendant, Johnston, is said to have been interested in avoiding the plaintiff’s judgment. But he was not a party to the issue, and might therefore become a witness by disposing of his own judgment, provided the act were bona fide, and not dictated by necessity to give it effect, by his testimony. He probably had no interest to get rid of; but he transferred it, whatever it was, in pursuance, not of his own overture, but…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Renschler v. PizanoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Assigned Estate of WrightSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Fonder v. RosensteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913