Cornish v. Cornish
This text of 56 Tex. 564 (Cornish v. Cornish) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is a suit for a divorce, in which, on the trial below, the court excluded the evidence of the plaintiff in his own behalf, and rendered judgment against him; and the only question for our decision is, whether in this the court erred.
Under our former statute (Pasch. Dig., art. 6826), to the effect that there should be no exclusion of any witness because a party to a suit or interested in the issue to be [565]*565tried, it was decided that this did not give parties to a divorce suit the right to testify in their own behalf. Stafford v. Stafford, 41 Tex., 111.
Our present statute, in force when this suit was tried, provides that “The husband or wife of a party to a suit or proceeding, or who is interested in the issue to be tried, shall not be incompetent to testify therein, except as to confidential communications between such husband and wife.” R. S., art. 2247. We are of opinion that this statute does not give parties to divorce suits the right to testify in their own behalf.
To permit such an innovation upon sound public policy and the salutary principles of the common law, the statute must be clear and explicit.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 Tex. 564, 1882 Tex. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cornish-v-cornish-tex-1882.