Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1842

Stevenson v. Chapman

Stevenson v. Chapman
Superior Court of New Hampshire · Decided January 15, 1842 · Parker
12 N.H. 524

Counsel

James Bell, & N. Emerson, for the defendant,, Bartlett, Sp Peabody, for the plaintiff.

Stevenson v. Chapman

Opinion of the Court

Parker, C. J.

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.

*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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.