Speer v. See Yup Co.

California Supreme Court

Speer v. See Yup Co.

13 Cal. 73

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1859

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 Cal. 73 (Speer v. See Yup Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Speer v. See Yup Co., 13 Cal. 73 (Cal. 1859).

Pincite

Opinion

Terry, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J. concurring.

The only error assigned in this cause is the exclusion of a Chinese witness offered by plaintiff.

Section 394, of the Civil Practice Act, provides “ that no Indian or Negro shall be allowed to testify as a witness in any action in which white person is a party;” and.in the People v. Hall, (4 Cal. 339,) it was held that the term “ Indian,” as used in the statute, included the Chinese or Mongolian race; and upon the authority of that decision, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Terry, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J. concurring.

The only error assigned in this cause is the exclusion of a Chinese witness offered by plaintiff.

Section 394, of the Civil Practice Act, provides “ that no Indian or Negro shall be allowed to testify as a witness in any action in which white person is a party;” and.in the People v. Hall, (4 Cal. 339,) it was held that the term “ Indian,” as used in the statute, included the Chinese or Mongolian race; and upon the authority of that decision, the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Cal. 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/speer-v-see-yup-co-cal-1859.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack