Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

W. H. SHIELDS and others v. A. H. SMITH and others.

Witness — Party in Interest.

Under sec. 343, C. C. P., a party to an action is a competent witness as to a transaction between himself and a person at the time of such examination deceased, when the representative of such deceased person is not a party to the action.

READE, J.

The question being whether a transaction between Hyman and Smith and Briggs was bona fide, the said Smith, one of the defendants, was allowed to testify as a witness to a conversation between himself and said Hyman as to the very transaction while it was in process of arrangement — the said Hyman being dead at the time of the trial. This would be in conflict with C. C. P., sec. 43, which provides that no party to the action * * * shall be examined in regard to any transaction or communication between such witness and a person at the time of such examination deceased, where the representative of such deceased person is a party. But here the representative of Hyman, the deceased person, is not a party and therefore the exclusion does not apply and the testimony was competent. This is the only question of importance, because the jury find the transaction bona fide.

Affirmed.

Cited: Hawkins v. Carpenter, 85 N.C. 482; Morgan v. Bunting, 86 N.C. 66; Gidney v. Moore, Ib., 484; Ledbetter v. Graham, 122 N.C. 754; McGowan v. Davenport, 134 N.C. 530 . (518)

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SHIELDS v. SMITH
(Jun 1, 1878)