Skellinger v. Howell

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Skellinger v. Howell

8 N.J.L. 383

DecidedMay 15, 1826

StatusPublished

This text of 8 N.J.L. 383 (Skellinger v. Howell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Skellinger v. Howell, 8 N.J.L. 383 (N.J. 1826).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court—(Stopping Vroom, contra)

A party may not give evidence of general bad character to impeach or discredit a witness whom he has called and examined; but if the witness state matters which operate against him, he .may call witnesses to prove those matters to be otherwise. Hence the second witness was rightfully examined; and the two witnesses differing as to the value, presented a question to the court to decide which should be preferred. They adopted the valuation of the second witness, and of the propriety of their determination, being matter of fact, we have-no authority to inquire.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

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

By the Court—(Stopping Vroom, contra)

A party may not give evidence of general bad character to impeach or discredit a witness whom he has called and examined; but if the witness state matters which operate against him, he .may call witnesses to prove those matters to be otherwise. Hence the second witness was rightfully examined; and the two witnesses differing as to the value, presented a question to the court to decide which should be preferred. They adopted the valuation of the second witness, and of the propriety of their determination, being matter of fact, we have-no authority to inquire.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 N.J.L. 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skellinger-v-howell-nj-1826.