History
  • No items yet
midpage
Vastbinder v. Metcalf
3 Ala. 100
Ala.
1841
Check Treatment
ORMOND, J.

The bill of exceptions is so vague and un--certain, that it is difficult to say what point was intended to be presented in this Court. It is clear, however, that the Court erred in permitting the written memorandum of the contract to go to the jury as evidence. It is obviously an unfinished contract of the parties, 'which as it was never executed by either, is not binding on either, and was, therefore, no evidence of the contract between the parties.

A witness who has made a memorandum of facts, may refresh his memory by referring to it; and if by that means he obtains a recollection of the facts themselves, as distinct from the memorandum, his statement is evidence. 1 Starkie on Ev. 127. For this purpose only, could this paper have been looked to by the witness, but it was hot evidence for any purpose whatever, to go before the jury.

The charge of the Court in reference to the slaves, as an abstract legal proposition, is correct; and unless the contrary be shown, we must presume that the evidence authorised the charge to be given.

For the error of the Court in permitting the unfinished contract to be given in evidence to the jury, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Case Details

Case Name: Vastbinder v. Metcalf
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Jun 15, 1841
Citation: 3 Ala. 100
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
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.