14 Me. 30 | Me. | 1836
The opinion of the Court was delivered the same term by
The plaintiff’s intestate was employed by the defendants to hew timber for them in the woods. While there, the intestate entered daily on a shingle, the quantity hewn by him
The witness rejected was clearly inadmissible on the ground of interest. If the defendants, for whom he was called, had prevailed, their land, which has been conveyed to him since this action, and which he has reconveyed with warranty, would be liberated from attachment. That a witness so circumstanced, is incompetent, although he may have taken a covenant of warranty from bis grantor, was decided in Schillinger v. McCann, 6 Greenl. 364, to which we refer.
Judgment on the verdict.