Morgan v. Franklin Insurance Co.

Citations

• 6 W. Va. 496

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. It is competent to impeach the credit of a witness hy proof that he has made statements inconsistent with the testimony he has given on the trial.</p> <p>2. It is proper, to lay a foundation for impeaching the credit of a witness, to first inquire of him, on cross-examination, whether he has not on’some former occasion given a different account, or made a different statement of a matter of fact, to which he has testified on the trial.</p> <p>8. After the denial, on cross-examination, of a witness that he has made such inconsistent or contradictory statement, although it is admissible, upon a principle of convenience or absolute necessity, to put the question to the impeaching witness in the same words it had heen put to the former witness, yet, it would he more satisfactory that the answer should ho obtained without a direct suggestion.</p> <p>4. If the question put to the impeaching witness, is not in the same words as put to-the former witness, it should, nevertheless, he relative, and sufficiently precise, so as to indicate to the impeaching witness the same subject matter or transaction, testified to by the former witness, and not so general as to introduce irrelevant and improper testimony.</p> <p>5. The question propounded to the witness, Arthur, is too general, and calculated to prejudice the merits of the case by the introduction of irrelevant and inadmissible matter.</p>