Richardson v. Golden
20 F. Cas. 709, 3 Wash. C. C. 109
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania·Decided October 15, 1811·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Both objections are good. The first has been often decided here. The second is supported on this ground, that the mode pursued in this case, is calculated to produce perjury. It is worse than asking [710]*710leading questions, or telling the witness what to say; because, he is here reminded of the necessity of swearing to what he has before stated, or of suffering in his credit. The answers to these questions cannot be read.
The parties, by consent, withdrew a juror.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Richardson v. Golden, 20 F. Cas. 709, 3 Wash. C. C. 109 (circtdpa 1811).
20 F. Cas. 709 (Richardson v. Golden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Williams v. Vreeland's Executors
30 N.J. Eq. 576 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1879)
Randel v. President of Chesapeake & Delaware Canal
1 Del. 233 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1833)