General

HUGH O'CONNOR, Respondent, v. JOHN HAMMOND, Appellant

1 Cal. Unrep. 11·Supreme Court of California·1856·CA

I concur: Heydenfeldt, J.

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

HUGH O’CONNOR, Respondent, v. JOHN HAMMOND, Appellant. No. 779; January 7, 1856. Witnesses. — The Question of the Incompetency of a witness to testify because of interest must be raised at the trial. APPEAL from Superior Court. W. H. Rhodes for respondent; E. L. B. Brooks for appellant. [MAJORITY — TERRY, J.] TERRY, J. — This cause was tried below by a jury, and the evidence fully sustains the judgment and there is no error on the record. The witness Barney, who testified on behalf of plaintiff, was incompetent, on account of interest, ánd would no doubt have been excluded if the objection had. been taken on the trial. This was not done, and the point cannot be raised here for the first time. The judgment is affirmed, with costs. I concur: Heydenfeldt, J.