Legal Opinion

Davis v. Tarbutton

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1931No. 3569PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

WATSON, J.

Plaintiff recovered judgment for the price of 6 bales of cotton, plus interest and costs, and defendants have appealed.

The cause was tried to the court. Plaintiff’s testimony was given by “oral examination out of court.” 1929 Comp. ch. 45, art. 4. Its reception in evidence was objected to on the ground of failure to serve written notice “upon the opposite party” of intention to apply for an order to take the testimony. 1929 Comp. § 45-402. The objection was overruled, the order having been issued upon waiver of such notice by the attorney of record for the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Buddicum v. KirkSupreme Court of the United States · 1806
  2. Domenchini's Administrator v. Hoosac Tunnel & Wilmington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1916
  3. Harris & Maldonado v. SperryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1930
  4. McKee v. WoodsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Carlisle v. WalkerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Moore v. Phillips Petroleum Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Winston v. AllisonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API