From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shields v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1878
79 N.C. 517 (N.C. 1878)

Summary

In Shields v. Smith, 79 N.C. 517, which is much relied on, Hyman, the deceased, was not the principal of any of the defendants, and his estate was not liable over to them or any of them. There was no such privity or connection between them and Hyman as would affect his estate by the judgment in the action.

Summary of this case from McGowan v. Davenport

Opinion

(June Term, 1878.)

Witness — Party in Interest.

Under sec. 343, C. C. P., a party to an action is a competent witness as to a transaction between himself and a person at the time of such examination deceased, when the representative of such deceased person is not a party to the action.

APPEAL at January Special Term, 1878, of HALIFAX, from Schenck, J.

His Honor overruled the objection to the testimony of the witness upon the facts set out in the opinion of this Court. Verdict and judgment for defendants and appeal by plaintiffs.

Mr. T. N. Hill, for plaintiffs.

Messrs. Gilliam Gatling and Busbee Busbee, for defendants.


The question being whether a transaction between Hyman and Smith and Briggs was bona fide, the said Smith, one of the defendants, was allowed to testify as a witness to a conversation between himself and said Hyman as to the very transaction while it was in process of arrangement — the said Hyman being dead at the time of the trial. This would be in conflict with C. C. P., sec. 43, which provides that no party to the action * * * shall be examined in regard to any transaction or communication between such witness and a person at the time of such examination deceased, where the representative of such deceased person is a party. But here the representative of Hyman, the deceased person, is not a party and therefore the exclusion does not apply and the testimony was competent. This is the only question of importance, because the jury find the transaction bona fide.

Affirmed.

Cited: Hawkins v. Carpenter, 85 N.C. 482; Morgan v. Bunting, 86 N.C. 66; Gidney v. Moore, Ib., 484; Ledbetter v. Graham, 122 N.C. 754; McGowan v. Davenport, 134 N.C. 530 . (518)


Summaries of

Shields v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1878
79 N.C. 517 (N.C. 1878)

In Shields v. Smith, 79 N.C. 517, which is much relied on, Hyman, the deceased, was not the principal of any of the defendants, and his estate was not liable over to them or any of them. There was no such privity or connection between them and Hyman as would affect his estate by the judgment in the action.

Summary of this case from McGowan v. Davenport
Case details for

Shields v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:W. H. SHIELDS and others v. A. H. SMITH and others

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1878

Citations

79 N.C. 517 (N.C. 1878)

Citing Cases

Hawkins v. Carpenter

Held further: where the defendant opens the door by his own evidence as to such transactions, the matter is…

Morgan v. Bunting

The testimony is not rendered inadmissible generally, but only when offered against the representative of a…