Holmes v. Comegys

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

Holmes v. Comegys

1 U.S. 439, 1 Dall. 439

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

DecidedJune 15, 1789

StatusPublished

This text of 1 U.S. 439 (Holmes v. Comegys) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Holmes v. Comegys, 1 U.S. 439, 1 Dall. 439 (1789).

Pincite

Opinion

But by

Shippen, President

It would be of very dangerous consequence, if it was established, that a commercial agent was not amenable as a witness in a Court of Justice, in a cause against his constituent. It is draining the matter of privilege too far: And, if the law makes him a witness, we are too fond of getting at the truth, to permit him to excuse himself from declaring it, because he conceives, that, in point of delicacy, it would be a breach of confidence.

By the Court :—Let the witness be affirmed.

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

But by

Shippen, President

It would be of very dangerous consequence, if it was established, that a commercial agent was not amenable as a witness in a Court of Justice, in a cause against his constituent. It is draining the matter of privilege too far: And, if the law makes him a witness, we are too fond of getting at the truth, to permit him to excuse himself from declaring it, because he conceives, that, in point of delicacy, it would be a breach of confidence.

By the Court :—Let the witness be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 U.S. 439, 1 Dall. 439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-comegys-pactcomplphilad-1789.