Hoge & Hutchinson v. Turner
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Augusta county rendered May 17, 1898, in an action of debt wherein the defendant in error was the plaintiff, and the plaintiffs in error were the defendants. This was an action of debt on an indemnifying bond. The plaintiffs in error sued out an execution against the goods and chattels of George Bowers, and caused the same to be levied on a stock of goods in the city of Staunton.
Read the full summary
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Augusta county rendered May 17, 1898, in an action of debt wherein the defendant in error was the plaintiff, and the plaintiffs in error were the defendants. This was an action of debt on an indemnifying bond. The plaintiffs in error sued out an execution against the goods and chattels of George Bowers, and caused the same to be levied on a stock of goods in the city of Staunton. Jennie Bowers, the wife of .George Bowers, claimed the goods and demanded an indemnifying bond, which was given, and the goods were sold to satisfy the execution. Thereupon…
1Opinion of the CourtBiely, J.
By the common law, husband and wife are incompetent to testify for or against each other. Neither of them is competent as a witness in a cause, civil or criminal, to which the other is a party. The rule applies to all cases in which the interests of the other party are involved. 1 Greenleaf on Evidence, secs. 334, 335; and William and Mary College v. Powell, 12 Gratt. 372, 382.
This prohibition against the competency of husband and wife to testify for or against each other is not confined to the case where the husband or wife is a party to the record. It applies equally where he or she is not…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Penn v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1867
- William & Mary College v. PowellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1855
- Hayes & Wife v. Va. Mutual Protection Ass'nSupreme Court of Virginia · 1882
- Brock's v. BrockSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
- Witz, Biedler & Co. v. OsburnSupreme Court of Virginia · 1887
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Chesapeake Shoe Co. v. SeldnerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1903
- Edmunds & Blackford v. Hobbie Piano Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1899
- Partlow v. LickliterSupreme Court of Virginia · 1902
- Capitol Motor Corp. v. Harry M. Lasker, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1924
- Seventh Street Garage Co. v. MercerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1928
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.