Haupt v. Haupt
Haupt v. Haupt
Opinion of the Court
This case was so fairly submitted to the jury by the learned judge of the court below that we cannot understand why exception has been taken to his charge. The jury may have made a mistake; but, if any such was made by the court, it has not been pointed out to us.
Nor do the exceptions to the rulings on admissions of evidence strike us as having any solid foundation. When a witness answers, as Brown did, “ I couldn’t tell,” it is of no consequence whether that question were properly or improperly allowed, for the answer harms no one. Clapp’s evidence was clearly admissible, whether used in chief or as rebutting. Lots 24 and 25 are embraced in the deed of partition, and if their location could not be proved by a competent artist, it is hard to say what the plaintiff could be permitted to prove. As to the competency of Dr. F. L. Haupt, there can be no doubt, and as there was no exception to his evidence, we have nothing before us on which to pass.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- In an action of ejectment, the plaintiff offered to prove by the evidence of the borough regulator, who was called in Rebuttal, that the witness had run the line between the lots in dispute and had made a correct map of them, and that the dividing line between the lots was exactly located upon the ground, as established by the papers. Held, that the evidence was properly admitted, although defendant’s evidence was directed tp the establishment of a division line by consent or adverse user. In an action of ejectment by the executors of a decedent, one of the executors, who was the son of the decedent, was objected to as a witness on the ground of interest, and exception taken, but no objection or-exception to the testimony was taken when it was given in evidence. Held, that the son was a generally competent witness, and, as no exception to the testimony was taken, there was nothing for the supreme court to review. It is an immaterial error to allow an improper question, where the witness answers by saying, “ I couldn’t tell.”