Collier's Executors v. Leech

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Collier's Executors v. Leech

29 Pa. 404

DecidedJuly 1, 1857

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Pa. 404 (Collier's Executors v. Leech) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Collier's Executors v. Leech, 29 Pa. 404 (Pa. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Lowrie, J.

We are unable to find fault, either for error or deficiency, with the charge of the court; but we think that Andrew Leech was a competent witness. He was a joint contractor with the defendant, but he was not a party to this suit and could not be, for the plaintiff had previously accepted a judgment against him in. a separate action. If he had any interest, it was rather against than for this defendant, so as to make him contribute to the debt. Neither interest nor any rule of policy excludes him: 16 Pick. 501; 6 Bing. 306; 7 Id. 395.

Judgment reversed and a new trial awarded.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Lowrie, J.

We are unable to find fault, either for error or deficiency, with the charge of the court; but we think that Andrew Leech was a competent witness. He was a joint contractor with the defendant, but he was not a party to this suit and could not be, for the plaintiff had previously accepted a judgment against him in. a separate action. If he had any interest, it was rather against than for this defendant, so as to make him contribute to the debt. Neither interest nor any rule of policy excludes him: 16 Pick. 501; 6 Bing. 306; 7 Id. 395.

Judgment reversed and a new trial awarded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Pa. 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colliers-executors-v-leech-pa-1857.