History
  • No items yet
midpage
Giles v. Smith
74 N.H. 238
| N.H. | 1907
|
Check Treatment

As the executrix did not elect to testify, the plaintiff was properly excluded as a witness to all facts occurring in the lifetime of the deceased as to which the deceased could have testified if living. P. S., c. 224, ss. 16, 17; Parsons v. Wentworth, 73 N.H. 122; Perkins v. Perkins,68 N.H. 264. Under the settled construction of the statute, the plaintiff could not testify to what Smith did or told him; nor to the contents of the letters, if Smith had seen them and therefore could have testified to their contents. Welch v. Adams, 63 N.H. 344, 351. The plaintiff's testimony was not competent unless the contrary appeared. Harvey v. Hilliard,47 N.H. 551; Fosgate v. Thompson, 54 N.H. 455; Parsons v. Wentworth, supra.

Exception overruled.

All concurred. *Page 240

Case Details

Case Name: Giles v. Smith
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: May 7, 1907
Citation: 74 N.H. 238
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
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.