American Express Co. v. Bradford

Mississippi Supreme Court

American Express Co. v. Bradford

82 Miss. 130

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1903

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 82 Miss. 130 (American Express Co. v. Bradford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Express Co. v. Bradford, 82 Miss. 130 (Mich. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

Calhoon, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think the motion to suppress the deposition of Dr. Harrison should have been sustained, for insufficiency of the affidavit required by code 1892, § 1747. That one is a physician in large practice, “and that it is likely that the said witness will be unable to attend trial,” etc., does not, in our opinion, bring the instance within the category meant by the words “or other cause” -in clause 1 of that statute.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Calhoon, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think the motion to suppress the deposition of Dr. Harrison should have been sustained, for insufficiency of the affidavit required by code 1892, § 1747. That one is a physician in large practice, “and that it is likely that the said witness will be unable to attend trial,” etc., does not, in our opinion, bring the instance within the category meant by the words “or other cause” -in clause 1 of that statute.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 Miss. 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-express-co-v-bradford-miss-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack