Pyles v. Piedmont Mt. Airy Guano Co.

Citations

• 58 Fla. 348

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action upon an endorsement of a promissory note where a defense is that the note was endorsed by inadvertence, and the defendant is permitted to testify that at the time he wrote certain letters in evidence recognizing his liability on the endorsement, he thought he was bound and had not consulted an attorney, and that he then thought and believed he was bound, it is not error to refuse to allow the defendant to again testify as to his belief that he was liable and had not consulted an attorney when he wrote the letters.</p> <p>2. In the absence of a statute or rule upon the subject, where the plaintiff has anything to prove in order to get á verdict, whether in an action ex contractu or ex delicto, and' whether to establish his right of action or to fix the amount of his damages, the right to begin and conclude the argument to the jury belongs to the plaintiff.</p> <p>3. If the plaintiff would succeed on the pleadings alone, the defendant may begin and conclude the argument; if the defendant would succeed, then there is something for the plaintiff to prove at the outset, and the plaintiff may begin and conclude the argument to the jury.</p> <p>4. Where there are several issues and the plaintiff has anything to prove under any one of them in the first instance, in order to recover, the right to open and close the argument is with him.</p> <p>5. In every case where the general issue, or a general or special denial is pleaded, the right to open and close is with the plaintiff, for then he has something to prove in the first instance, no matter what may he the nature of the controversy, or what special defenses may he set up.</p> <p>6: In an action on a promissory note where there is a common count and a plea of the general issue, the plaintiff must prove something in order to recover and consequently has the right to open and conclude the argument to the jury.</p>