Banks v. Clegg
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error, to the District Court at Philadelphia. . A judgment was entered in the District Court in the name of Joseph Clegg against Philip Banks. Judgment entered, September 24, 1889, on bond and warrant of attorney. May 8, 1841, this judgment marked to the use of Francis Blackburne. July 20, 1843, this judgment marked to the use of John Taylor, junior. July 21, 1843, sei.fa. issued to revive the judgment.
Read the full summary
Error, to the District Court at Philadelphia. . A judgment was entered in the District Court in the name of Joseph Clegg against Philip Banks. Judgment entered, September 24, 1889, on bond and warrant of attorney. May 8, 1841, this judgment marked to the use of Francis Blackburne. July 20, 1843, this judgment marked to the use of John Taylor, junior. July 21, 1843, sei.fa. issued to revive the judgment. In February, 1845, the case was on trial, before Stroud, J., and after defendant’s evidence under the plea of payment had been concluded, Mr. Fallon, plaintiff’s attorney, was offered on the…
1Per curiam
— The rule is settled with us, that a witness may not remove an appearance of interest in him, by his own oath. Here the witness, having taken an assignment of the judgment to himself, continued to be the ostensible owner of it till shortly before the trial; and then assigned it to the actual owner to take his name off the record. Had the declarations at the second assignment been made at the first, they would have explained the transaction before an appearance of interest had attached to it, and shown the witness to be, what he was in truth, a nominal owner; but their explanation of a bygone…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lipscomb v. GraceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1870