Beirne v. Rosser & Turner

Citations

• 26 Va. 537
• 26 Gratt. 537

Syllabus

<p>■1. R brings assumpsit against B, in the county of N, and the process is •served upon him. B appears at the rules, and files a plea in abatement, that at the time of the service of the process upon him, and at this time, he was not and is not a resident of N; but was and is an inhabitant of, and resides in M county, West Virginia. This plea does not give the plaintiff a better writ in this state; and is therefore bad.</p> <p>.2. Plaintiff offers in evidence the copy of a letter from himself to the defendant, and states that defendant replied to that letter. He states on oath that he placed the letter with other papers in the hands of his counsel in West Virginia; that he had written to his counsel to send him his papers by express, which the counsel did, writing to him at the same time that he had sent him all of his papers that were in his hands; but the letter and other papers which he put in the counsel’s hands were not in the package of papers so sent. That he had not since applied to the counsel for the letter, because he supposed it was useless after the counsel’s letter saying he had sent all the papers. Held : There being no suspicion of fraudulent purpose, that parol proof of the contents of defendant’s letter was admissible in evidence.</p> <p>.3. The exception of the defendant to the admission of parol proof of the contents of his letter, not stating what was so proved, the appellate court cannot know whether or not the appellant was injured by the evidence, and therefore cannot reverse the judgment even if the admission of the evidence was improper.</p>