Cowan v. . Layburn

21 S.E. 175, 116 N.C. 526
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 5, 1895·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Faibcloth, C. J.:

The only exceptions were to the competency of the .evidence of Thad Cowan and Catharine Cowan, under The Oode, Sec. 590. The former testified that “1 carried food there to her”, meaning to Ann Jane Croom; the latter, that “I went to carry her supplies. She was sickly. I was there every day. I carried her supplies. She was sickly. She had no food except what we carried. She was bad off for clothes.”

*528 ¥e see no £< conversation ” or transaction ” in tliis evidence, sncb as is inhibited by section 590. In fact it does not appear whether the old lady accepted or refused the food and supplies.

Affirmed.

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

Cowan v. . Layburn, 21 S.E. 175, 116 N.C. 526 (N.C. 1895).

21 S.E. 175 (Cowan v. . Layburn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davidson v. Bardin.
51 S.E. 779 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1905)
Moore v. Palmer
132 N.C. 969 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1903)
Johnson v. . Rich
23 S.E. 1007 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1896)