Kelton v. Hill
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ON EXCEPTIONS. Assumpsit to recover for service rendered by Joseph Thompson, since deceased, the plaintiff’s intestate. The writ is dated May 14, 1867, and the suit, was instituted by the present plaintiff as administrator of the estate of Joseph Thompson. At tlie trial the plaintiff did not offer to testify, and neither was he called or sworn as a witness.
Read the full summary
ON EXCEPTIONS. Assumpsit to recover for service rendered by Joseph Thompson, since deceased, the plaintiff’s intestate. The writ is dated May 14, 1867, and the suit, was instituted by the present plaintiff as administrator of the estate of Joseph Thompson. At tlie trial the plaintiff did not offer to testify, and neither was he called or sworn as a witness. But, against the seasonable objection of the plaintiff, the three defendants were called and sworn as witnesses in their own behalf, and they were permitted to testify to material facts which occurred after, but not before the death of the…
1Opinion of the CourtBarrows, J.
The single question presented by the exceptions is whether, under the provisions of the Revised Statutes of 1871, in cases where an executor or administrator is a party, the adverse painty can be permitted to testify in relation to facts occurring subsequent to the decease of the testator or intestate, unless the executor or administrator offers his own testimony at the trial, the deceased never having testified in the case.
Chapter 82, section 82, abrogates the common-law rule, excluding parties to civil suits from giving testimony therein, “ except as hereinafter provided.”
Section 87…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Warner v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1855
3Cited by2 opinions
- Levy v. DwightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
- Newton v. FreemanMichigan Supreme Court · 1921