From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bedell v. Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1828
12 N.C. 483 (N.C. 1828)

Opinion

June Term, 1828.

From Wake.

Notice to take a deposition on a particular day of every week, for three successive months, is insufficient.

ASSUMPSIT, and upon the trial the plaintiff offered to read the deposition of one Richard Bedell. The notice to the defendant was that the deposition would be taken "on the Saturday of every week in July, August, and September, at, etc., in the city of New York." His Honor, Judge Daniel, rejected the deposition, thinking the notice too vague, although the plaintiff proved that the witness was a seafaring man, and that it was impossible to give notice with any certainty of a particular day when he would be in New York, or in any other seaport.

Devereux for the plaintiff.

Badger contra.


The plaintiff was nonsuited, and appealed.


It is impossible to consider a notice of this kind sufficient without opening a door to abuses of the most mischievous tendency. Testimony by deposition is, at best, inferior to that by witnesses, and ought to be so guarded that the court may have every reasonable assurance of its truth. Under a vague notice of this kind a man might be kept three months from home, if the witness did not appear (484) till the last Saturday in September. The utmost extent which has yet been allowed is one week, where the deposition was to be taken at a great distance from the residence of the parties.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Bedell v. Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1828
12 N.C. 483 (N.C. 1828)
Case details for

Bedell v. Bank

Case Details

Full title:MOTT BEDELL v. THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTORS OF THE STATE BANK

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1828

Citations

12 N.C. 483 (N.C. 1828)

Citing Cases

Ridge v. Lewis

The depositions are taken with sufficient certainty, and ought to be read; the exceptions, therefore, are…

Harris v. Peterson

All this is avoided by naming two or more successive days; and as the witness lived in Georgia, in this case,…