Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 N.J.L. 477

Read v. Barker

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 15, 1865

Supreme Court of New Jersey · decided 1865-06-15

<p>1. Read, the defendant below, leased to Barker & Barker, tbe plaintiffs, a mill and water power, and covenanted with them for the nse of the water, in as full and ample a manner as lie had enjoyed-it. The plaintiffs alleging that the defendant had placed a trunk in the pond in such a manner as to carry off the waters of a certain spring, which was one of the principal tributaries to the pond, brought suit to recover damages. Seld, that the opinion of millers and mill-wrights, whether they be called experts or practical men, as to the quantity of grain the mill was capable of grinding and the value of the water for milling purposes, together with the statements of the methods used for measuring or weighing, was competent evidence.</p> <p>2. When a witness, who has been in attendance during the progress of a trial, fails to appear when called, the court will not reverse a judgment for that cause — no motion* having been made to postpone the case or procure the testimony of the witness, de bene esse, and especially when it appears that the evidence of the witness, had he been present, would have been only cumulative.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1913

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1865-06-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The Chief Justice announced the judgment of the court, affirming the judgment below.

¶2No written opinion was delivered.

¶3For affirmance — Beasley, C. J., Bedle, Clement, Cornelison, Kennedy, Van Dyke, Vail, Vredenburgh, Wales.

¶4For reversal — None.

¶5Judgment affirmed.

/32/njl/477 · .json · Public domain