Fullam v. Rose

Citations

• 181 Pa. 138
• 37 A. 197
• 1897 Pa. LEXIS 517

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Handwriting—Disputed signature— Competency of witness.</p> <p>A statement by a witness that the signature to a check looked like that of the person alleged to have drawn the check, without more, is wholly insufficient to justify the admission of the check in evidence for any purpose, especially for the purpose of being used as a test paper.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Statements of counsel during trial — Charge of court— Misleading charge. *</p> <p>It is reversible error for a trial judge to state to the jury that a paper sued on “was found among the belongings of” plaintiff’s testator, when the evidence does not show where the paper was found, or when or how it came into plaintiff’s possession.</p> <p>In an action by an executor, it appeared that the paper sued upon was omitted from the inventory of testator’s estate. The court charged that the omission of the paper from the inventory was sufficiently accounted for by the statement of plaintiff’s counsel “ that it was a disputed matter, and therefore it was not counted among the assets.” There was nothing in the evidence on which to base the statement made by counsel. Held, that the charge was misleading and prejudicial to the defendant, and that a judgment for the plaintiff should be reversed.</p>