Barnes v. McCrate

32 Me. 442
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedApril 15, 1851
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 32 Me. 442 (Barnes v. McCrate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barnes v. McCrate, 32 Me. 442 (Me. 1851).

Opinion

Tenney, J.,

orally.—It is not denied that there is, in some cases, a protection to witnesses for words duly spoken in the course of legal proceedings. Does that protection extend to this witness under the circumstances ?

There can be no question that if a witness, taking advantage of his position, and departing from what rightfully pertains to the case, should voluntarily slander one of the parties, he would be liable. But when called upon, in the progress of a cause, and under the rules of the court, and confining himself to that which rightfully pertains to the case, he is not liable for the testimony he may give. To hold otherwise would tend to intimidate a witness and to deter from a disclosure of [447]*447the whole truth. He might have no means to prove his statements. He may have been robbed while alone. Should he testify to the fact, in the course of a regular trial of the offender, he would not be liable for his statement. This is a doctrine of the highest legal policy.

A witness is not supposed to know the exact line of proceeding. He is, therefore, under the direction of the court. In this case, a question was duly put to the witness, either by the court or by counsel. And it does not appear that, in his answer, he went beyond the scope of the question. If the question was put by the court, there could be no liability for answering it; if put by the plaintiff’s counsel, the plaintiff can have no ground of complaint that it was answered; if put by the defendant’s counsel, objection should have been made, and, if improper, it would have been excluded.

Nonsuit confirmed.

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

Related

Bradbury v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC
780 F. Supp. 2d 114 (D. Maine, 2011)
Marrogi v. Howard
805 So. 2d 1118 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2002)
Costanzo v. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission
50 Pa. D. & C.4th 414 (Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas, 2001)
Cooper v. Parker-Hughey
1995 OK 35 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1995)
Panitz v. Behrend
632 A.2d 562 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Bruce v. Byrne-Stevens & Associates Engineers, Inc.
776 P.2d 666 (Washington Supreme Court, 1989)
Creamer v. Danks
700 F. Supp. 1169 (D. Maine, 1988)
Briscoe v. LaHue
460 U.S. 325 (Supreme Court, 1983)
Overman v. Klein
654 P.2d 888 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1982)
Briscoe v. Lahue
663 F.2d 713 (Seventh Circuit, 1981)
Dineen v. Daughan
381 A.2d 663 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1978)
Briggs v. Goodwin
569 F.2d 10 (D.C. Circuit, 1977)
Hurley v. Towne
156 A.2d 377 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1959)
Dunbar v. Greenlaw
128 A.2d 218 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1956)
LaPorta v. Leonard
97 A. 251 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1916)
Houghton v. Humphries
147 P. 641 (Washington Supreme Court, 1915)
Myers v. Hodges
53 Fla. 197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1907)
Acre v. Starkweather
76 N.W. 379 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1898)
Crecelius v. Bierman
59 Mo. App. 513 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 Me. 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-mccrate-me-1851.