Doane v. Glenn

Supreme Court

Doane v. Glenn

88 U.S. 33, 22 L. Ed. 476, 21 Wall. 33, 1874 U.S. LEXIS 1337

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedNovember 23, 1874

Docket55

StatusPublished

Cited by22 cases

This text of 88 U.S. 33 (Doane v. Glenn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Doane v. Glenn, 88 U.S. 33, 22 L. Ed. 476, 21 Wall. 33, 1874 U.S. LEXIS 1337 (1874).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice SWAYNE,

having stated the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

None of the objections to the reading of the deposition go to the testimony of the witness. All of them relate to defects and irregularities which might have been obviated by retaking the deposition. It does not appear that any notice beforehand was given to the counsel of the plaintiffs that they would be made. In such cases the objection must be noted when the deposition is taken, or be presented by a motion to suppress before the trial is begun. The party taking the deposition is entitled to have the question of its admissibility settled in advance. Good faith and due diligence are required on both sides. When such objections, under the circumstances of this ease, are withheld until the trial is in progress, they must be regarded as waived, and the deposition should be admitted in evidence. This is demanded by the interests of justice. It is necessary to prevent surprise and the sacrifice of substantial rights. It subjects the other party to no hardship. All that is exacted of him is proper frankness.

The settled rule of this court is in accordance with these views. *

The District Court erred in excluding the deposition, and *36 the Supreme Court of the Territory erred, ¡is regards this point, in affirming the judgment. ■

Judgment reversed, and the case remanded with direction to issue

A VENIRE DE NOVO.

*

The York Co. v. Central Railroad, 3 Wallace, 113; Shutte v. Thompson, 15 Id. 160; Buddicum v. Kirk, 3 Cranch, 293.

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

Mr. Justice SWAYNE,

having stated the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

None of the objections to the reading of the deposition go to the testimony of the witness. All of them relate to defects and irregularities which might have been obviated by retaking the deposition. It does not appear that any notice beforehand was given to the counsel of the plaintiffs that they would be made. In such cases the objection must be noted when the deposition is taken, or be presented by a motion to suppress before the trial is begun. The party taking the deposition is entitled to have the question of its admissibility settled in advance. Good faith and due diligence are required on both sides. When such objections, under the circumstances of this ease, are withheld until the trial is in progress, they must be regarded as waived, and the deposition should be admitted in evidence. This is demanded by the interests of justice. It is necessary to prevent surprise and the sacrifice of substantial rights. It subjects the other party to no hardship. All that is exacted of him is proper frankness.

The settled rule of this court is in accordance with these views. *

The District Court erred in excluding the deposition, and *36 the Supreme Court of the Territory erred, ¡is regards this point, in affirming the judgment. ■

Judgment reversed, and the case remanded with direction to issue

A VENIRE DE NOVO.

*

The York Co. v. Central Railroad, 3 Wallace, 113; Shutte v. Thompson, 15 Id. 160; Buddicum v. Kirk, 3 Cranch, 293.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 U.S. 33, 22 L. Ed. 476, 21 Wall. 33, 1874 U.S. LEXIS 1337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doane-v-glenn-scotus-1874.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack