Clifton v. Bogardus
Clifton v. Bogardus
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court:
Upon a judgment in favor of the defendant, Bogardus, against Moses Clifton, an execution was issued and levied on property claimed to be the property of Mary Clifton. Upon the trial of the right of property between Mary Clifton and Bogardus, in the Circuit Court, Moses Clifton was called by the plaintiff to support her title; but his testimony was rejected by the Court, because he was the debtor in the execution upon which the property was taken. This is the error relied upon for the reversal of the judgment of the Circuit Court. It is a general rule that all persons are competent witnesses who have sufficient understanding, and are not disqualified by interest, crime, or want of a proper sense of moral obligation to speak the truth. It does not appear from the record of this cause, that any of these objections were applicable to the witness whose testimony was rejected by the Court. His being the debtor
The interest which disqualifies, must be in favor of the party calling the witness. The reverse of this position is true in the present case. The Court, therefore, erred in rejecting the testimony of the witness, and the judgment must be reversed with costs, and the cause remanded to the Court below.
Judgment reversed.
Browne, Justice, was not present at the argument of this cause.
By the act passed Jan. 30, 1835, it is provided, “ that in nq case of the trial of right of property,” under the laws of this State, “shall the defendant in execution be a competent witness.” Acts of 1835, 56; Gale’s Stat. 588.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Mary Clifton, in error v. John L. Bogardus, in error
- Status
- Published