Hepburn v. Cassel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In ERROR. ON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Luzerne . . county, it appeared, that this suit was brought by Henry Cassel, for the use of Benjamin Perry, against Patrick Hepburn, on a promissory note for one hundred dollars, drawn r- » . t _ . . at Lancaster, on the 21st April, 1817, by-Hepburn, payable to Henry Cassel, or order, one year after date. It was endorsed by John Smith, Henry Cassel, and Benjamin Perry, , J J ...
Read the full summary
In ERROR. ON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Luzerne . . county, it appeared, that this suit was brought by Henry Cassel, for the use of Benjamin Perry, against Patrick Hepburn, on a promissory note for one hundred dollars, drawn r- » . t _ . . at Lancaster, on the 21st April, 1817, by-Hepburn, payable to Henry Cassel, or order, one year after date. It was endorsed by John Smith, Henry Cassel, and Benjamin Perry, , J J ... J ’ whose names stood m the order m which they are here mentioned. The defendant’s counsel, having called John Smith, as a witness, he was objected to, because his…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson J.
There is no colour for the pretence that Smith, the witness, had such an interest, as affected his competency ; for being liable, if at all, to Cassel or Perry, and not to the defendant, by whom he was called, his evidence, by defeating the recovery in this suit, would have called into immediate action, whatever liability he may have contracted, from his name being on the note. Whether he was in fact liable to any body, it is not only unnecessary, but very difficult to determine, especially as we know not under what agreement his name came on…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Harrisburg Bank v. ForsterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Mitchell v. ConrowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Dunbar v. BreeseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1841
- Marcy v. GardinierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838