Curtis v. Knox
New York Supreme Court
On error from the supreme court. The action in the court below was assumpsit, brought by Kriox as president of the Bank of Vernon, an institution organized under the general banking law, against Curtis, Peabody & Tillotson, as maker and endorsers of a promissory note.
Read the full summary
On error from the supreme court. The action in the court below was assumpsit, brought by Kriox as president of the Bank of Vernon, an institution organized under the general banking law, against Curtis, Peabody & Tillotson, as maker and endorsers of a promissory note. Each of the defendants pleaded non-assumpsit, and the cause was tried before Gridley, C. Judge, at the Oneida circuit in October, 1842. The plaintiff made the proof necessary to entitle him to recover; upon which the defendants called one Case, who was admitted to be a large stockholder in the bank, and to have been such from…
1Opinion of the Court
Lott, Senator.
No rule is better settled than that a witness is privileged from testifying where his answers would subject him to a penalty or render him liable to conviction for a criminal offence. The court is to determine whether the case is such *343that the answers can criminate him, and he is then to judge from his own knowledge of the particular facts whether he can safely answer. (The People v. Mather, 4 Wend. 229, 254.) The question in this case is whether the witness was so situated that he could be guilty of the offence of usury in the transaction in question. If he could be, then his…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. MatherNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Commonwealth v. FrostMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re TaylorNew York Supreme Court · 1894
- Pollock v. Steam-Boat LauraDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1880
- In re LewisUnited States District Court · 1869
- In re TaylorCourt Of Oyer And Terminer New York · 1894