No person offered as a witness shall be excluded, by reason of incapacity from interest or crime, from giving evidence either in person or by deposition, according to the practice of the court, on the trial of any issue joined, or of any matter or question, or on any inquiry arising in any suit or proceeding, civil or criminal, in any court, or before any judge, justice, jury or other person having, by law, authority to hear, receive and examine evidence; and every person so offered shall be admitted to give evidence, notwithstanding such person may or shall have an interest in the matter in question, or in the event of the trial of the issue, or of the suit or other proceeding in which he is offered as a witness. This section shall not be construed to apply to attesting witnesses to wills. (1866, c. 43, ss. 1, 4; C.C.P., c. 342; 1869-70, c. 177; 1871-2, c. 4; Code, ss. 589, 1350; Rev., ss. 1628, 1629; C.S., s. 1792.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 1948–2004 · leading case:
In Re Shepard, 591 S.E.2d 1 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
In Re Shepard, 591 S.E.2d 1 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “Beyond this due process protection, there are no specifics as to the proper conduct of the GAL who is acting purely as a guardian and *229 not an attorney (thus falling outside of the North Carolina State Bar’s Revised Rules of Professional Conduct).”
Sanderson v. Paul, 69 S.E.2d 156 (N.C. 1952).
· cites it 2× “Hence, it was incumbent upon one who challenged the competency of the witness to show disqualification. Here, no evidence was offered to show that the value of the interest the witness would take as heir was greater than that conveyed by the deed, and that she was therefore…”
State v. Davis, 50 S.E.2d 37 (N.C. 1948).
· cites it 2× “G.S. 8-49. Evidence is the means whereby the truth of a matter may he established, and its production should not be barred unless clearly prohibited by statute, or in the interest of a well-defined public policy.”
State v. Surles, 230 N.C. 272 (N.C. 1949).
“” Incapacity to testify as a witness on account of crime, which was in force when the statute under scrutiny was adopted, was removed by an act of 1866, which is now embodied in G.”
In the Matter of Farmer, 299 S.E.2d 262 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).
“See G.S. 8-49; G.S. 8-50; and 1 Bran-dis on North Carolina Evidence, §§ 53 and 54.”
Sanderson v. Paul, 69 S.E.2d 156 (N.C. 1952).
“Hence, it was incumbent upon one who challenged the competency of the witness to show disqualification. Here, no evidence was offered to show that the value of the interest the witness would take as heir was greater than that conveyed by the deed, and that she was therefore…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.