62 N.H. 469 | N.H. | 1883
The question presented is, whether the plaintiff should have been permitted to testify as to the understanding between him and his wife as to the ownership of the shares of stock of which she had the legal title, either as a matter of right or discretion, to prevent injustice. It is said in Moore v. Taylor,
The rule governing the court in the exercise of the discretionary power conferred by the statute, to admit the surviving party to a transaction to testify to prevent injustice, is stated in Chandler v. Davis,
We think the testimony of the appellant was rightly excluded, and that he should be charged, as administrator, for the six shares of stock, and not for the money in the savings-banks.
Exceptions overruled, and decree of the probate court modified accordingly.
DOE, C. J., did not sit: the others concurred. *473