Barnard v. Randle
Citations
- 110 F. 906
- 49 C.C.A. 177
- 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4342
Syllabus
<p>1. Trial — DemuRher to Evidence — Waiver.</p> <p>A defendant waives bis demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence by the subsequent introduction of evidence to the merits on his own behalf.</p> <p>2. Writ of Error — Necessity of Exceptions.</p> <p>Where no objection is made or exception taken to the evidence introduced by the opposite party, and no'ruling thereon is invoked or made, there can be no error for review.</p> <p>8, Same — General Finding — Consideration of Findings of Fact oh Conclusions of Law Drawn from the Evidence.</p> <p>Where a jury is waived, and the case is tried by the court, and no special finding of facts is made, the only questions arising on the evi-fience which can be presented to or considered by this court are the rulings upon the admission or rejection of evidence in the progress of the trial, and, in cases where that question is presented by a proper request at the close of all the evidence, the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant the finding.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- ordering the parties to confer regarding the examination “and submit a brief report to the court concerning the necessary arrangements for the examination.”
- permitting recording where plaintiff had “low average” IQ, limited reading and vocabulary skills, and a “lengthy history of serious mental issues” that, defendant believed, motivated plaintiff to manipulate the examination
- finding videorecording would provide the court with the best evidence of whether defendant’s expert conducted a fair exam and if plaintiff manipulated the exam, and further expressing doubt that plaintiff was capable of relaying to his counsel what took place during exam
- finding videorecording would provide the court with the best evidence of whether defendant’s expert conducted a fair exam and if plaintiff manipulated the exam, and further expressing doubt that plaintiff was capable of relaying to his counsel what took place during exam
- special circumstances supported recording when party had long history of mental illness that could prevent his communication with counsel
- wherein objective evidence was presented as to the plaintiff’s low IQ, limited reading and vocabulary skills, and history of serious mental health issues resulting in institutionalization
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Eoch, Ren, Sanborn, Thayer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.