History
  • No items yet
midpage
Frost v. Barber
173 F. 847
U.S. Circuit Court for the Dis...
1909
Check Treatment
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

The federal practice does not permit examination of a party before trial. Hanks Dental Ass’n v. International Tooth Crown Co., 194 U. S. 303, 24 Sup. Ct. 700, 48 L. Ed. 989. The object of section 863, Rev. St. (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 661), is not to enable a party to ascertain, in advance of the trial, what will be the testimony of some particular witness, but solely to secure him against *848going to trial without the testimony of every witness whom he believes he should call, or examine.

This object will be attained in the present case by denying this application, with the proviso that, when the cause is called for trial, the witness, who is the plaintiff, shall be present in court and within the reach of a subpoena, and that if he should not be so present the trial be postponed long enough to enable the defendant to take his testimony,, wherever he may then be.

Case Details

Case Name: Frost v. Barber
Court Name: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
Date Published: Oct 6, 1909
Citation: 173 F. 847
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.