Perry v. Rubber Tire Wheel Co.
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.
TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.
The counsel herein are engaged in taking depositions under section 863, Rev. St. [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 661], The plaintiff and her husband have refused to.an *837 swer certain questions, and counsel for defendant has moved for an order to direct the witnesses to answer said questions. It is thought that the rule laid down in Blease v. Garlington, 92 U. S. 1 , 23 L. Ed. 521 , should be applied in the taking of such depositions. There is some uncertainty as to the practice in such cases, but the duty of this court is merely to see that the witness is properly protected in his constitutional rights, and that the process of the court is not abused. Wertheim v. R. R. (C. C.) 15 Fed. 716 . The question as to the admissibility of the evidence is to be tested by the laws of the forum. Pritchard v. Norton, 106 U. S. 124 , 1 Sup. Ct. 102, 27 L. Ed. 104 . The general rule is that the witness should be required to answer all questions which may possibly be material. Matter of Whitlock, 51 Hun, 354 , 3 N. Y . Supp. 855; Matter of Strong v. Randall, 90 App. Div. 192 , 85 N. Y. Supp. 1089 ; Id., 177 N. Y. 400 , 69 N. E. 721 .
An order may be entered that the witnesses Augusta E. E. Perry and John W. Perry answer the questions put to them.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 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.