Kercheval v. Ambler, 34 Ky. 166 (1836)

Citation: Kercheval v. Ambler, 34 Ky. 166 (1836)
Parent Document: Kercheval v. Ambler, 34 Ky. 166 (1836)
Jurisdiction: Kentucky (state)
Effective Date: 1836-06-09
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7459288/kercheval-v-ambler/ ↗

Full Text

861 chars

Now, although a moral certainty of his inability to attend in person, as a witness, is not the necessary deduction from these facts, nevertheless, we are indisposed to disapprove the judgment of the Circuit Court upon *169them, for threé reasons: (1.) Some latitude of discretion must be conceded to courts in such cases; and we Cannot decide that A sound discretion has been abused in this case. (2.) The facts may authorize the opinion, rathér that the witness could not, than that he could have safely attended court. (3.) His deposition, though pertinent, was not, in our judgment, prejudicial to the fights óf thé appellant, because, without it, theré cóuld have been but little, if any, reason for doubting the fact which it tended to establish. We are, therefoi'e, not disposed to reverse the judgment of the Circuit Courtj for admitting that deposition.

Other Sections in This Document (21)

Full Text