Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

59 N.H. 521

Snell v. Parsons

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 5, 1880

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1880-06-05

Assumpsit. The defendant filed in set-off an account for services as a lawyer. The plaintiff, an executrix, did not elect to testify. Subject to exception, the court refused to permit the defendant to put in evidence his hook of accounts supported by his suppletory oath. Verdict for the plaintiff.

Relies on Swain v. Cheney · Moore v. Taylor · Eastman v. Moulton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1880-06-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably State v. U. S. & Canada Express Co. (1880), State v. Pennoyer (1889)

26 state decisions

70188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bingham, J.

¶1 Generally a party could not testify at common law, but he could give in evidence bis books of account supported by his suppletory oath. Eastman v. Moulton, 3 N. H. 157. The fact that the other party was an executor or administrator did not affect this right. By Gen. Laws, c. 228, s. 13, it is provided that a party may testify in any civil cause. Sections 16 and 17 of the same chapter provide that neither party shall testify when the adverse party is an executor, administrator, or insane person, unless the executor, administrator, or guardian elects to testify, except it clearly appears to the court that injustice may be done without his testimony. Section 16 is intended as an exception to section 13, and not as an exception to the right which the party had at common law to give in evidence his books of account supported by his oatb. The law in this respect remains as it was before any statute was enacted upon the subject. Moore v. Taylor, 44 N. H. 370, 374; Swain v. Cheney, 41 N. H. 232; Page v. Whidden, ante, p. 507; Peirce v. Burroughs, ante, p. 512.

¶2 Verdict set aide.

Foster, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
/59/nh/521 · .json · Public domain