Doane v. Glenn
| Citation | 88 U.S. 33,22 L.Ed. 476,21 Wall. 33 |
| Parties | DOANE v. GLENN |
| Decision Date | 01 October 1874 |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the Territory of Colorado.
as J. W. Doane & Co.), the plaintiffs in error in this case, commenced a suit in the first judicial district of the Territory for the county of Arrapahoe, against Oliver S. Glenn and Rufus E. Tapley. A writ of attachment was issued in their behalf, and certain personal property, described in the sheriff's return, was seized. Lockhart T. Glenn and George O. Tapley filed an 'interplea,' and claimed the property as belonging to them. The plaintiffs replied, denying the truth of the allegations of the interplea, and concluding to the country.
This proceeding is understood to have been according to the laws of the Territory. The issue made between the interpleaders and the plaintiffs was tried by a jury. Upon that trial the plaintiffs offered in evidence the deposition of James W. Hanna, a resident of the city of Chicago. It was taken under a dedimus issued pursuant to a notice served upon the counsel for the interpleaders. A copy of the interrogatories to be propounded to the witness was served with the notice. It appeared that the clerk opened, published, and filed the deposition by order of the court. The bill of exceptions contained the following passages:
'The plaintiffs then offered to read in evidence the deposition of James W. Hanna, taken May 29th, A.D. 1871, before William L. English, Esq., Cook County, Illinois; to the reading of which said deposition the said interpleading claimants, by their attorneys, objected on the grounds——
'1st. Because the parties in suit, John W. Doane, Patrick J. Towle, and John Roper, partners, as J. W. Doane & Co., commission specifies suit of Doane, Towle, Roper, and Raymond are parties, and dated May 8th, A.D. 1871, out of Weld County.
'2d. Because deposition is in this cause and not in the interpleader, and does not permit interrogatories to be propounded in behalf of the claimants.
'3d. Because there is no authentication of the official character of a notary public.
'4th. The commission is to take the deposition of James H. Hanna, and deposition taken is that of J. W. Hanna.
'Which said objection to the reading of said deposition to the jury was sustained by the court, and the said court refused to permit said deposition so to be read; to which ruling of the court in excluding said deposition from the jury the said plaintiffs, by their attorneys, then and there excepted; and which said deposition is in the words and figures following, to wit,' &c.
Verdict and judgment having been given for the defendant, and the Supreme Court of Colorado having affirmed the judgment, the plaintiffs brought the case here.
Messrs. Chipman and Hosmer, for the plaintiffs in error; no opposing counsel.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rojas v. People
...recognized it since at least the 1870s, see Doane v. Glenn, 1 Colo. 495, 499-501 (1872), rev'd on other grounds by Doane v. Glenn, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 33, 22 L.Ed. 476 (1874). The Latin phrase, which means "things done," Res Gestae , Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019), encompassed eviden......
-
Rojas v. People
...early forms of res gestae since at least the 1870s. See Doane v. Glenn, 1 Colo. 495, 499-501 (1872), rev'd on other grounds by Doane v. Glenn, 88 U.S. 33 (1874). in its more modern form, res gestae has been a part of our jurisprudence for over ninety years. See Abshier v. People, 289 P. 108......
-
Crane Co. v. Neel
... ... 161; Coony v. Murdock, 54 Mo ... 351; Christie v. Railway, 94 Mo. 456; Hannibal ... v. Knudson, 62 Mo. 569. As to depositions: Doan v ... Glenn, 88 U.S. 33; Howard v. Stilwell, 139 U.S ... 199; Nix v. Rector, 4 Ark. 275; Hatfield v ... Perry, 4 Harr. (Del.) 464; Edleman v. Byers, 75 ... ...
-
Howard v. Stillwell Bierce Manuf Co
...158 et seq; Bank v. Seton, 1 Pet. 299, 307; Winans v. Railroad Co., 21 How. 88, 100; York Co. v. Railroad Co., 3 Wall. 107, 113; Doane v. Glenn, 21 Wall. 33, 35; Buddicum v. Kirk, 3 Cranch, 293, 297; Rich v. Lambert, 12 How. 347, The remaining assignment of error, which relates to the strik......
-
The Expanding Use of the Res Gestae Doctrine
...Gaussen, 86 U.S. 198, 213 (1873); C.R.E. 801(d)(2); F.R.E. 801(d)(2). 12. Doane v. Glenn, 1 Colo. 495, 499 (1872), rev'd on other grounds 88 U.S. 33 (1874). 13. Solander v. Doane, 2 Colo. 48, 63 (1873); C.R.E. 801(d)(2)(E). 14. Jones v. People, 6 Colo. 452, 458 (1882); C.R.E. 803(3). 15. Gr......