Gardner v. Spalt

Citations

• 86 Wash. 146
• 149 P. 647
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 887

Syllabus

<p>Witnesses — Impeachment—Immorality. Upon the cross-examination of a witness, she may be required to answer as to whether she had not been convicted of keeping a house of prostitution.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error — Evidence. It is not necessarily prejudicial error to receive in evidence upon cross-examination a letter containing self-serving declarations that were immaterial, instead of permitting only the material part to be read to the jury, where, on request, the court instructed the jury to disregard the improper parts.</p> <p>Same — Review—Error Invited by Appellant. Error cannot be predicated upon the admission of the entire record in a certain case, where the error was invited by appellant by insisting that the whole record go in, upon the offer of only a part of it.</p> <p>Same — Review—Harmless Error — Instructions. It cannot be assigned that a general instruction upon the limitation of certain evidence is insufficient where no more specific instruction was requested.</p> <p>Trial — Scope of Evidence — Rebuttal. Where respondent had been satisfied to submit a check as bearing its own evidence of a different handwriting, and appellant undertook to establish that it was in the handwriting of the drawer, and so testified, it is not prejudicial error to allow a handwriting expert to testify in rebuttal that part of it was not in the drawer’s handwriting.</p> <p>Appeal — Record — Statement of Facts — Improper Argument. Error cannot be predicated upon improper argument to the jury, not disclosed by the statement of facts and shown only by affidavits in support of a motion for a new trial.</p>