M'Leod v. Johnston
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court. It is a general rule, that the testimony of a witness who might be a gainer or loser by the event of a cause, must be rejected. This interest, however, to produce a disqualification, (Peake’s Evidence, 93. and 1 Term Rep. 163.) must be vested, or certain, and not remote, possible, or contingent. I think Donaldson?s evidence is of the latter description. His interest is completely neutralized. Whatever amount is recovered in this suit, and credited to his account by the present plaintiff, he is liable for to Main, to whom the money received on the attachment belongs, and who of course is liable for his proportion of the debt only, so that no bias can be presumed to exist on the mind of this witness, thus standing perfectly indifferent between the parties.
I must confess that I have doubts as to the competency of Main. It is true, as was contended, if the plaintiff recovers, he must be credited to that amount by the company ; and if he fails, the defendant still continues responsible to him. In this respect his interest may be balanced; but his testimony went also towards a liquidation of his own demand as to the amount recovered on the attachment
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.