Odiorne v. Wade
This text of 25 Mass. 518 (Odiorne v. Wade) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court. The question as to the competency of the witnesses whose testimony was rejected at the trial, was decided in the case of Lufkin v. Haskell. The distinction was there taken, between cases in which the town, in its corporate capacity, has an interest, and those in which the inhabitants of a town have a right of common, or way, or other easement; which is not a corporate right, but a privilege to the individual inhabitants, depending generally upon prescription arising from their locality. The statute of 1792 w'as only intended to remove the incompetency of witnesses in the first class of cases ;1 and as it is a departure [536]*536from the common law rule of evidence, it ought not to be extended by construction beyond the expressed intention of the legislature.
Judgment according to verdict.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 Mass. 518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odiorne-v-wade-mass-1829.