History
  • No items yet
midpage
Stockham v. Jones
10 Johns. 21
N.Y. Sup. Ct.
1813
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

As Jerome was named in the writ and could not be taken, and was proved to be a party concerned in the trespass, he was an incompetent witness according to the old rule. (Bull. N. P. 286. Lloyd v. Williams, Cases temp. Hardw. 115.) But since the case of Bent v. Baker, and which has for many years been adopted by this court, as the proper rule, (Van Nuys v. Terhune, 3 Johns. Cases, 82.) the incompetency of a witness, on the ground of interest, must be confined to a legal fixed interest *23in the event of the suit. Jerome had no such interest, and the objection went only to his credit.

The verdict must be set aside, and a new trial awarded, with costs to abide the event.

New trial granted.

Case Details

Case Name: Stockham v. Jones
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 15, 1813
Citation: 10 Johns. 21
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sup. Ct.
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.