Legal Opinion

Hill v. Eldridge

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 28, 1879PublishedCited by 21 opinions

Contract on an account annexed for goods sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. Infancy, and that the goods sold were not necessaries. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Gardner, J., without a jury, the only question in issue was that of the defendant’s infancy.

Read the full summary

Contract on an account annexed for goods sold and delivered. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. Infancy, and that the goods sold were not necessaries. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Gardner, J., without a jury, the only question in issue was that of the defendant’s infancy. The defendant was a witness, and, against the plaintiff’s objection, was permitted to testify that, when the goods were purchased, he was sixteen years of age, and that, at the time of the trial, he was twenty-three years of age. It appeared that the defendant’s father was dead at the time of the trial, but it did…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

This case does not present the question whether a person can be permitted to testify to the precise day of his birth. It is quite clear that one may testify, from his own knowledge of himself, whether he was twenty-one or sixteen years of age at a certain time, (which was the only material point upon which the testimony of the defendant appears to have been admitted,) and that such weight may be given to his testimony as the court or the jury trying the case may think it entitled to receive. See Cheever v. Congdon, 34 Mich. 296; Watson v. Brewster, 1 Penn. St. 381, 383; State v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. CainWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Cheever v. CongdonMichigan Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Koester v. . Rochester Candy WorksNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. People v. RatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Stevens v. ElliottSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  4. Commonwealth v. StevensonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
  5. State v. MillerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API