McCabe v. Hand
McCABE v. HANDs.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Joseph G. Baldwin (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Baldwin
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Cope, J. concurring.
The Court erred in excluding the witness Reeves. He was not incompetent. His promise to indemnify the defendants—if that be the language on the voir dire—did not create a legal obligation; and it is only an interest recognized as such by law in the event of the suit which excludes. Nor did his supposition that the plaintiff would take a part of his land disqualify him. It is the fact of interest, not the incorrect notion of it, which incapcitates him.
It is not deemed necessary to notice other points.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.