McDermott v. Mitchell

California Supreme Court
McDermott v. Mitchell, 47 Cal. 249 (Cal. 1874)

McDermott v. Mitchell

Opinion of the Court

By the Court:

1. The answer filed in the case of Brock v. Mitchell and Root was not admissible in evidence against Mitchell in this action. True, it was the joint answer of Boot and Mitchell in that action, verified by Boot—but not verified by Mitchell . As to the latter, it was the mere work of the attorney, and, therefore, not admissible as evidence against the client in another action.

2. We understand the answer in the action of Brock v. Mitchell and Root to have been the only evidence offered to prove that the defendant procured the plaintiffs to execute the undertaking on appeal, or to prove that Mitchell directed or requested Middleton to take an appeal in the Ellsworth case, and it being inadmissible-for that purpose, the judgment cannot be supported.

Judgment and order denying a new trial reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.

Reference

Full Case Name
ARTHUR McDERMOTT and F. W. DAY v. H. K. MITCHELL
Cited By
4 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
An Answeb in a Suit as Evidence.—A joint answer of two defendants, signed by their attorney, and verified by only one of them, is not admissible in evidence, for the purpose of proving the allegations therein contained, in an action brought against the defendant who did not sign or verify.