17 Me. 235 | Me. | 1840
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Proof of certain declarations of Stevens, the witness and alleged partner, was rejected, and in our judgment properly. They had no tendency to prove, that Stevens was or was not a partner, nor were they adduced to contradict his testimony, nor would they have had that effect.
The writs instituted and judgments obtained by other persons against the alleged partners, including Stevens, offered and received in evidence, although objected to, were not legally admissible to prove the facts established by the judgments, in virtue of their rendition. Burgess v. Lane, 3 Greenl. 165, is an authority directly in point. The plaintiff cannot avail himself of a judgment, as such, by which he would not have been bound. It is upon another
It is contended, that the Judge erred in one of the reasons which he gave for the admission of this testimony; but that is quite immaterial, it being in our opinion upon other grounds legally admissible.
Exceptions overruled.