Bradbury v. Dougherty

7 Blackf. 467, 1845 Ind. LEXIS 78
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided July 23, 1845·Published

Opinion

THE refusal to continue a cause on account of the absence of a witness, if the continuance be applied for on a sufficient affidavit, is error. Vanblaricum v. Ward, 1 Blackf. 50.

The execution-defendant is a competent witness for the plaintiff, on a trial of the right of property. Hankins et al. v. Ingols, 4 Blackf. 35.

[468]*468The circumstance that a person has executed an appeal-bond in the name of the plaintiff and as his attorney in fact, in the case of an appeal from a justice’s judgment, does not render him incompetent as a witness for the plaintiff, on the trial of the cause in the Circuit Court.

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

Bradbury v. Dougherty, 7 Blackf. 467, 1845 Ind. LEXIS 78 (Ind. 1845).

7 Blackf. 467 (Bradbury v. Dougherty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vanblaricum v. Ward
1 Blackf. 50 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1819)
Hankins v. Ingols
4 Blackf. 35 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1835)