Dawson v. Poston

U.S. Circuit Court

Dawson v. Poston

28 F. 606, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2327

DecidedSeptember 18, 1886

StatusPublished

This text of 28 F. 606 (Dawson v. Poston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dawson v. Poston, 28 F. 606, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2327 (uscirct 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Hammond, J.

* * * If the deposition so prepared were the one offered in evidence, I should find no difficulty in almost entirely excluding it. Perhaps it may not be a ground for the suppression of the deposition or exclusion of the evidence, but certainly it is so much of a discrediting circumstance that the testimony is entitled to but little weight. In Re Eldridge, 82 N. Y. 161, it was held a contempt of court to so prepare a deposition, and the court clearly sets forth the worthlessness of such proof. I held, in another case, that it was a contempt to prompt the witness, and advise her not to answer. U. S. v. Anon., 21 Fed. Rep. 771. But the deposition here offered was not that written out by the party, and the witness seems, in speaking to the notary, to he loss under the influence of the plaintiff, than when he speaks directly through him. * * *

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

Hammond, J.

* * * If the deposition so prepared were the one offered in evidence, I should find no difficulty in almost entirely excluding it. Perhaps it may not be a ground for the suppression of the deposition or exclusion of the evidence, but certainly it is so much of a discrediting circumstance that the testimony is entitled to but little weight. In Re Eldridge, 82 N. Y. 161, it was held a contempt of court to so prepare a deposition, and the court clearly sets forth the worthlessness of such proof. I held, in another case, that it was a contempt to prompt the witness, and advise her not to answer. U. S. v. Anon., 21 Fed. Rep. 771. But the deposition here offered was not that written out by the party, and the witness seems, in speaking to the notary, to he loss under the influence of the plaintiff, than when he speaks directly through him. * * *

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 F. 606, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dawson-v-poston-uscirct-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack