McNew's Executors v. Rogers

1 Thompson 32, 1 Shan. Cas. 17
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1848
StatusPublished
Cited by50 cases

This text of 1 Thompson 32 (McNew's Executors v. Rogers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McNew's Executors v. Rogers, 1 Thompson 32, 1 Shan. Cas. 17 (Tenn. 1848).

Opinion

Gums, J.,

' delivered the opinion of the Court:

1. The order of 1845 was revived by the express words of the order of 1847, and therefore the depositions of J. C. Petre and Alvis Kincaid were taken in pursuance of an order of Court. The argument that the order of January, 1847, revived only the special orders made in the cause, and did not apply to the general order of January, 1845, is not satisfactory. But it is said there was no notice shown. When it appears that the party attended and cross-examined the witnesses, it is not necessary to show a notice to take the depositions.

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

Related

Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Rupe
283 N.W. 108 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1938)
Anastos v. Brown
161 A. 218 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1932)
Buhl v. McDowell
242 N.W. 638 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1932)
Brost v. Juul
266 Ill. App. 423 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1932)
Cook, Borden & Co. v. R. Z. L. Realty Corp.
147 A. 891 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1929)
James H. Tower Iron Works v. B. R. Realty Co.
4 R.I. Dec. 15 (Superior Court of Rhode Island, 1927)
B. R. Realty Corp. v. Phenix Nat'l Bank
3 R.I. Dec. 170 (Superior Court of Rhode Island, 1927)
Calumet & Chicago Canal & Dock Co. v. Davis
218 Ill. App. 176 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1920)
Novak v. Kruse
123 N.E. 519 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1919)
Kent v. Bailey
181 Iowa 489 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)
Thomas v. Hall
100 A. 502 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1917)
In re Lenters
225 F. 878 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1915)
West v. Dana
152 N.W. 504 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1915)
Heck v. Casey
83 A. 757 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1912)
Paslick v. Shay
147 S.W. 369 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1912)
State v. King
63 S.E. 468 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1908)
Markus v. Thompson
111 S.W. 1074 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1908)
Nixon v. City of Burlington
115 N.W. 239 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1908)
Prindiville v. Curran
132 Ill. App. 162 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Thompson 32, 1 Shan. Cas. 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcnews-executors-v-rogers-tenn-1848.