Hopkins v. Mathews Admr. ( 1863 )

The Court

sustained the objection.

Gilpin, C. J.,

referring to and reading the" rule of evidence in regard to the matter, from 1 Greenl. Ev. secs. 569, 569 a.

Layton then recalled the witness, who further testified that he drew as many as a hundred notes that day for persons who had bought goods at the vendue. That it was not his custom to sign, and that he never did sign his name as a witness to a note, or any other written instrument, before the signing of it by the person giving it; and that he did not sign the note in question, or any other note that day as a witness, before it was signed by the person, who was to give it; and from the fact that he knew the signature to it to be that of Hoplnns, as well as his own as a witness, to be genuine, and from his recollection of the circumstances attending the transaction, he had no doubt that he witnessed the execution of it by him, and either saw him sign it, or heard him acknowledge it as his note, or as his signature, before he subscribed his name to it as a witness.

The Court held that this proof was sufficient to admit the note to go to the jury, and if would be for them to decide upon the evidence they had before them in regard to it,' whether it was, or was not, the note of Hopkins, the defendant in the action. In announcing the opinion, the Chief Justice referred to the rule as stated- in 2 Greenl. M). sec. 295.

The plaintiff had a verdict.