Thomas v. Fos

Citations

• 51 Wash. 250
• 98 P. 663
• 1908 Wash. LEXIS 1007

Syllabus

<p>Witnesses — Calling Adverse Party — Rebuttal. Bal. Code, §§ 6008, 6012, expressly authorize the examinatiou of the adverse party as a witness, and the rebuttal of his evidence by adverse testimony, although he was called as the party’s own witness at the opening of the trial.</p> <p>Appeal — Review — Harmless Error — Trial — Instructions — Statements of Counsel. It is not prejudicial error for the court to instruct that the jury are not to consider statements of counsel as evidence “unless it corresponds with your memory of the evidence' as you heard the witness detail it,” where the jury had been instructed that the case must be decided upon the testimony detailed upon the witness stand, and could not have been misled.</p> <p>Trial — Argument of Counsel — Reply. It is not prejudicial error to fail to restrict the reply argument of counsel to matters already commented on, where the court in ruling upon the objection stated that if the rules were transgressed he would give an opportunity to reply, and no request was made for leave to answer.</p> <p>Discovery — Subpoena Duces Tecum — Failure to Produce Papers —Presumption—Question for Jury. The failure of a party to produce evidence within his possession, in compliance with a subpoena duces tecum, raises the presumption that they are what the adverse party claims them to he; and it is proper to so instruct the jury, and to instruct that it is for the jury to determine whether he complied with the subpoena.</p>