Spitzer v. Stillings
Spitzer v. Stillings
Opinion of the Court
Epitomized Opinion
First Publication of this Opinion
Or'ginal action in the Common Pleas to recover the value of a car of corn wherein' Joseph P. Spitzer and Ulrich J. Coats were plaintiffs and James Ray Stillings, executor of Hai'ley A. Moninger, deceased, and Grover F. Mon-inger were defendants. The petition alleged that the corn was -sold to H. M. and G. M., a partnership. G. M. made no defense. H. M. answered, denying that he was a member of the partnership or that he purchased the corn. The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff.
At the trial both plaintiffs testified at length as to facts and circumstances tending to prove H .M. a member of the partnership and that he participated in the purchase in question. H. M. endeavored to subject both plaintiffs to cross-examination concerning admissions it was alleged plaintiffs had made to an attorney at the time of the purchase indicating that the transaction was with G. M. alone. The court sustained objections to. such cross-examination and later, said attorney being placed on the stand,'sustained objections to the same questions whieh were-asked him.- Defendant G. M. ■prosecuted error to the . Court of Appeals which - reversed- - the judgment on the ground-, i of -the exclusion of ■ that.. evidence. Plaintiffs -proseduted error to the Supreme Court wb'ch held:
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.