Jones v. Beeson
James M. Jones and another v. Strother M. Beeson
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Campbell, J:
Suit was brought before a justice of the peace, upon a note in favor of William B. Beeson, deceased, and on the defense it was sought to introduce evidence of payment by one of the defendants. Several questions were put and all ruled out. One of them related to payment made since suit brought or at the commencement of suit, and one was directed to a payment made to agents of the deceased. All the questions were ruled out as relating to matters equally within the knowledge of witness and decedent.
*215 These questions, in order to fall within that objection, should be distinctly aimed at such matters as were objectionable. No question on the record appears affirmatively to have been of such a character. Some of them might possibly have related to such transactions, and might, upon an objection, have been required to be limited so as to avoid the difficulty. Several questions could not possibly have been within the prohibition of the statute.
The court below should not have affirmed the judgment.
The judgment of the circuit court, affirming the justice’s judgment, must be reversed, and the judgment of the justice reversed, with costs of all the courts.
The other Justices concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.