Leet v. Wilson

Citations

• 24 Cal. 398

Syllabus

<p>Notice to Testify.—Where notice was given of a party’s intention to testify in his own behalf, and the notice specified with sufficient particularity some points pertinent to the issues upon which he would give evidence, and also stated generally that he would testify to other facts relative to the issues, and on the trial a general objection was interposed to his giving any testimony under the notice— which objection was overruled, and the record does not set out the testimony ; held, that it will not be presumed that the party gave testimony on any matters except those particularly1 specified in the notice, and that the objection was properly overruled.</p> <p>Objection to Witness.—Under such notice a party has a right to testify on such matters as are specified in the notice, and a general objection to his giving testimony as a witness is not well taken.</p> <p>Action for Work and Labor.—In an action to recover the value of services, and work and labor performed under a contract, the plaintiff has the right to prove the value of the services of an assistant employed by him, and who performed the same work plaintiff contracted to do, unless it appears by the nature or terms of the employment that the services of a particular person were contracted for, and that no other person could, under the contract, fill the place of the employé. Objection to Evidence.—A general objection that evidence is inadmissible should be disregarded, as it amounts to no more than that the evidence is illegal. The grounds of an objection should be specified and fully pointed out.</p>