Newman v. Buzard

Citations

• 24 Wash. 225
• 64 P. 139
• 1901 Wash. LEXIS 518

Syllabus

<p>PLEADING-AMENDMENT OE COMPLAINT ON TRIAL.</p> <p>In an action to quiet title in which the defendants had set up the defense that the taxes on the land in controversy had been paid by them, it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to permit the plaintiff on the trial to amend her complaint by interlineation so as to show payment of taxes for certain years by her grantor.</p> <p>EVIDENCE-'OBJECTION TO ADMISSION-TIMELINESS.</p> <p>The refusal of the court to strike the testimony of a witness, on the ground that it related to transactions with a deceased person and that the witness was disqualified under Bal. Code, § 5991, as being a party in interest, was not error, where the testimony was admitted without objection, the witness subjected to a rigid cross-examination on the matters involved, but no examination made as to his alleged interest and no opportunity afforded him for explanation, and the motion to strike his testimony was not interposed until some days following its admission.</p> <p>PAROL-ADMISSIBLE TO IDENTIFY DESCRIPTION IN DEED.</p> <p>Under the rule that parol evidence is admissible to identify the property described in and conveyed by a deed, in order to ascertain to what property the particulars of description in the deed apply, it is permissible to prove by parol that a tract of land described in a deed as “lot 6” was intended to include an unnumbered fractional lot adjoining.</p>