Doe v. Roe
1 Ant. N.P. Cas. 109
Opinion
This testimony can be offered for no other purpose than to impeach the credibility of the witness who has been sworn. And in this point of view it is certainly too remote, and is, therefore, inadmissible.
D. B. Ogden, for the plaintiff.
Emmet, for the defendant.
Vide Germond v. Germond. 6 John. C. C. 347, 349; S. C., 1 Paige, 83; Wood v. Wood, 2 Paige, 113.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Doe v. Roe, 1 Ant. N.P. Cas. 109 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).
1 Ant. N.P. Cas. 109 (Doe v. Roe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Germond v. Germond
1 Paige Ch. 83 (New York Court of Chancery, 1828)
Wood v. Wood
2 Paige Ch. 108 (New York Court of Chancery, 1830)