Hastings v. Speer & Co.

Citations

• 15 Pa. Super. 115
• 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 312

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Admission in statement not denied in affidavit — Parol contract.</p> <p>The question at issue being as to what were the terms of a parol agreement, an admission in plaintiff’s statement, which was material and relevant to the issue, was competent evidence on behalf of defendant, and where the plaintiff had put in evidence so much of the statement as was “ admitted and not denied in the affidavit of defense ” and where this part of the statement was not denied, it was evidence for-all purposes as fully as if the defendant had ottered it. It follows that it was error to refuse defendant’s counsel permission to read and comment on the same to the jury.</p> <p>Evidence — General rule of cross-examination.</p> <p>Under the general rule cross-examinations must be confined to matters stated in the examination in chief.</p> <p>In any event a defendant can claim no prejudice from being held strictly to the rule as thus stated when, having called the plaintiff as under cross-examination in the presentation of his, defendant’s case, he was permitted to cross-examine fully on the matter in which his cross-examination, pending the plaintiff’s case, was excluded.</p>