Vairin v. Canal Insurance
Ohio Supreme Court
This is an action of assumpsit from the county of Hamilton. The suit is brought on a policy of insurance upon the steamboat Swan. On the trial, the plaintiff, in order to prove an insurable ^interest in the boat, in connection with other testimony, [224 offered in evidence to the jury a letter from Joseph J. Dersey, one of the owners, in the following words.
Read the full summary
This is an action of assumpsit from the county of Hamilton. The suit is brought on a policy of insurance upon the steamboat Swan. On the trial, the plaintiff, in order to prove an insurable ^interest in the boat, in connection with other testimony, [224 offered in evidence to the jury a letter from Joseph J. Dersey, one of the owners, in the following words. “ Cincinnati, December 23, 1837. “ Justus Vairin, Esq., Present, Dear Sir: “ In consequence of the purchase by me and others of the steamboat Swan from you, for the principal part on time, say my draft at six months from this date on A.…
1Opinion of the CourtHitchcock, J.
The first question for the consideration of the court in this ease is, whether the letter of Dersey, of December 23, 1837, was properly received in evidence. The objection urged to this letter is, not that it contains matter irrelevant to the issue, but that Dorsey himself should have been examined as a witness, to prove the facts stated in the letter, so that the defendants might have had the benefit of his cross-examination. The letter seems to be considered as a species of hearsay evidence, but it is entirely of a different character. And had Dersey *himself been a [226 witness before the…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Zoppo v. Homestead InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Denny v. FaulknerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
- Brenner v. BigelowSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Marietta & Cincinnati R. R. v. Strader & Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1876
- City of Wyandotte v. NobleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.