American Express Co. v. Bradford

Mississippi Supreme Court
American Express Co. v. Bradford, 82 Miss. 130 (Miss. 1903)
Calhoon

American Express Co. v. Bradford

Opinion of the Court

Calhoon, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think the motion to suppress the deposition of Dr. Harrison should have been sustained, for insufficiency of the affidavit required by code 1892, § 1747. That one is a physician in large practice, “and that it is likely that the said witness will be unable to attend trial,” etc., does not, in our opinion, bring the instance within the category meant by the words “or other cause” -in clause 1 of that statute.

Reversed and remanded.

Reference

Full Case Name
American Express Company v. James L. Bradford
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
Witness. Depositions. Evidence. Physician. Code 1892, §1747. The fact that a -witness is a physician, living in another county, having a large practice and whose professional engagements are so much more than ordinarily numerous as to render it likely that he will be unable to attend court, does not authorize the taking of his deposition, under code 1892, § 1747, providing that the deposition may be taken of a witness who is about to depart from the state, or who, by reason of age, sickness or “other cause,’’ shall be unable, or likely to be unable, to attend court.