Meredith v. Kent's

Full title: MEREDITH v. KENT'S EX'RS. — 1 Mart., 28

Court: Superior Court of North Carolina HALIFAX

Date published: Oct 1, 1792

1 N.C. 52 (N.C. Super. 1792)

Opinion

October Term, 1792.

The deposition of a witness residing in another state may be read, though he be in the State at the time of trial, and has been summoned in the cause while in the State.

In the course of this trial it was moved by Stone, for the defendant, to read the deposition of a witness who resided in Georgia when it was taken, though he was in Bertie County at the time, and had been attending this Court as a witness in the cause, but he was not now present.

Objected by Lowther, for the plaintiff, who opposed the introduction of the testimony totis viribus, upon the ground that this was not the best evidence; as the witness might have been and was actually summoned in the cause, whilst in the State.

But McCOY, J., declared it to be the settled practice to admit the deposition absolutely; as by the residence of the witness in another State, there could be no forfeiture for nonattendance, though summoned.

Cited: Kinzey v. King, 28 N.C. 78; Stern v. Herren, 101 N.C. 519; State v. Means, 175 N.C. 823.

(53)