Rutherford v. Moore
This text of 21 F. Cas. 96 (Rutherford v. Moore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
stopped him, and doubted whether that mode of proceeding had ever been adopted in any court; and whether the fact, if proved, did not go rather to the credit than the competency of the witness.
THE COURT asked Mr. Key for authorities. He cited Esp. N. P.; and Peake, Ev. 90; Omychund v. Barker, 1 Atk. 21; 1 Wils. 84; Willes. 538.
THE COURT inclined to think that the only mode of proving the fact of belief has heretofore been by an examination of the witness himself, and that it ought to go rather to the credit. But Mr. Key waived the question as to the competency, and examined his witnesses as to the credibility.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 F. Cas. 96, 1 Cranch 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rutherford-v-moore-circtddc-1807.