Pennsylvania v. Farrel

Washington County Court of Common Pleas

Pennsylvania v. Farrel

1 Add. 246

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County

DecidedSeptember 15, 1794

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Add. 246 (Pennsylvania v. Farrel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pennsylvania v. Farrel, 1 Add. 246 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1794).

Pincite

Opinion

President.

You may either argue or reserve the point.

They agreed that it should be reserved; and the forgery and publication were proved.

Brackenridge for defendant. Unless the court has doubts on the point of competency, seeing the witness has to plain an interest to invalidate his own obligation, I hope the court will instruct the jury to disregard the testimony.

I will not do so. The cases on this subject are not very consistent; but I acquiesce in the cases of Abrams v. Bunn, and of Pennsylvania v. Keating, and hold the witness competent. His credibility lies with the jury.

Verdict guilty.

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