
    Verdier v. Hume and Hume.
    February Term, 1810.
    Equity Practice — Verdict Obtained on Testimony of One Witness Who Is Contradicted. — A verdict obtained at law, on the testimony of a single witness, whose answer (when he is brought into ■equity on the ground of his being a partner) is clearly contradicted, should be set aside, and a new trial directed.
    There was an injunction in this case, as to 351. 17s. part of a judgment at law against the plaintiff, in favour of one of the defendants, which the bill alleged was won at gaming, and that the judgment was obtained upon the testimony of the other defendant, who, it was alleged, was a partner of the plaintiff at law, of which a discovery was sought. The answer denied the partnership, or that any money was won at gaming. The proof was clear that a part of the 351. 17s. .was for money won, and that the defendant, on whose testimony the verdict was found, proved the whole demand : and now a motion was made to dissolve the injunction.
   By the Chancellor.

The verdict in this case stands upon the testimony of a witness who proved the demand, and who has denied in his answer, that any part thereof was for gaming, notwithstanding the proof to the contrary and his *knowledge of the fact: a verdict therefore under such circumstances ought not to be relied upon, and a new trial was ordered.  