Speer v. See Yup Co. (1859) · DecisionDepot

Speer v. See Yup Co.

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1859Published

Before: Terry

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the Chinese or Mongolian race is included within the term "Indian" as used in Section 394 of the Civil Practice Act, thereby prohibiting a Chinese witness from testifying in an action where a white person is a party.

Issues

Whether a Chinese witness is prohibited from testifying in an action where a white person is a party under Section 394 of the Civil Practice Act.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the term “ Indian,” as used in the statute, included the Chinese or Mongolian race; and upon the authority of that decision, the judgment is affirmed.”

Synopsis

People Hall, (4 Cal. 339,) excluding Chinese witnesses in suits to which white persons are parties, affirmed.

Terry, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court Field, J. concurring.

The only error assigned in this cause is the exclusion of a Chinese witness offered by plaintiff.

Section 394, of the Civil Practice Act, provides “ that no Indian or Negro shall be allowed to testify as a witness in any action in which white person is a party;” and.in the People v. Hall, (4 Cal. 339,) it was held that the term “ Indian,” as used in the statute, included the Chinese or Mongolian race; and upon the authority of that decision, the judgment is affirmed.

Speer v. See Yup Co.

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief