Wendt v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Railway Co.

Citations

• 4 S.D. 476
• 57 N.W. 226
• 1893 S.D. LEXIS 95

Syllabus

<p>1. A party in cross-examining- a witness, cannot go beyond the subject-matter of his examination in chief, except to show,his bias or prejudice, or to lay the foundation for discrediting- his evidence, by showing that he had made prior contradictox-y statements. Within these limits, the law permits the examination of the witness as to evex-y fact touching the matter to which he testified on his examination in chief, so that his temper, leanings, relation to the parties and the cause, his intelligence, accuracy of his memoi-y, his disposition to tell the truth, his means of knowledge, his general and particular acquaintance with the subject-matter, may be fully interrogated.</p> <p>2. The rule that a party who has not opened his own case will not be permitted to introduce it to the jury by a cross-examination of the witnesses of the adverse party, applies only to such matters as the examining pax-ty has pleaded affirmatively as a defense, counterclaim, or reply, and does not apply when a defendant, on cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witness, simply aims to disprove by the witness the case which the witness himself has made.</p> <p>3. A party, on the cross or re-examination of a witness, is only entitled to call out the entire conversation, a part of which has been given by the witness, so far as it relates to the same subject-matter.</p> <p>4. A party is not entitled, under the rule that he has a right to the whole conversation, of which a part has been given, to a conversation relating to some other subject, or which occurred at another time or place.</p> <p>5. When a question asked a witness is not objectionable of itself, but the answer is not responsive thereto, and goes beyond the question, and the answer contains improper or incompetent evidence, a motion to strike out the answer, or so much as may not be responsive to the question. or as may be improper or incompetent, may be made; and the fact that the party did not object to the question does not pre