Robinson v. Gilman
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit to recover the amount of two promissory notes made by the defendant’s intestate. As to these notes no controversy ivas made.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit to recover the amount of two promissory notes made by the defendant’s intestate. As to these notes no controversy ivas made. A set-off was filed, in which the defendant claimed that one John Rollins was indebted to said N. Gilman, in two promissory notes, one dated January 1, 1846, for $127, payable in six months from date, and the other dated April 30, 1847, for $126.40, on demand, with interest, and that said J. L. Robinson, on the first day of July, 1854, promised and agreed to and with said N. Gilman, then the holder and owner of these notes, that in case said Gilman would not…
1Opinion of the CourtBartlett, J.
As Mr. "Wood was competent to testify, evidence of his statements was inadmissible. Tenney v. Evans, 14 N. H. 347. The circumstance that he had forgotten the facts to which he formerly testified does not render his former testimony competent. Drayton v. Wells, 1 N. & McC. 409, cited in 1 Gr. Ev., sec. 163, n, and 1 C. & H’s Notes to Phill. Ev. 329. The failure of the recollection of a witness may sometimes work a hardship to a party, but it is not one peculiar to a case like the present. We do not think the exception to the general rule has been extended in this State so far as to permit the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Clute v. SmallNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Bradley v. DavisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1846