Stevenson v. Chapman
This text of 12 N.H. 524 (Stevenson v. Chapman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The objection to the admission of the witness cannot be supported.
It seems to be well settled, that a grantor may be a witness to show that his deed is invalid, even for fraud, if he have no interest in the case. 5 N. H. Rep. 181, Hadduck vs. Wilmarth ; 9 N. H. Rep. 347, Marston vs. Brackett; 2 Ld. Raym. 1008, Title vs. Grevett; 11 Mass. R. 368, Worcester vs. Eaton; Ditto 498, Loker vs. Haynes; 15 Pick. R. 420, Hudson vs. Hurlburt; 13 Maine 9, Wise vs. Tripp; 4 Vermont R. 493, Seymour's Ad'r vs, Beach; 6 Johns. R. 135, Jackson vs. Frost; 6 Wend. R. 415, Jackson vs. Packard.
The weight of his testimony, if he swear to his own turpitude, is to be considered by the jury.
[526]*526It is now settled in this state, in relation to negotiable paper, that a party who has given currency to it is a competent witness to show that it was void at the time. 9 N. H. Rep. 349, Marston vs. Brackett; Odiorne vs. Howard (10 N. H. Rep. 343) ; Haines vs. Dennett, (11 N. H. Rep. 180.)
Judgment for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 N.H. 524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevenson-v-chapman-nhsuperct-1842.