McElheny v. Pittsb. Ry. Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
McElheny v. Pittsb. Ry. Co., 147 Pa. 1 (Pa. 1892)
23 A. 392; 1892 Pa. LEXIS 775
Clark, Green, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams

McElheny v. Pittsb. Ry. Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The single assignment of error is to the admission of evidence as to the location and height of the highway bridge. It is sufficient to say, in answer to this objection, that the subject was introduced by the appellant upon the cross-examination of the plaintiffs’ witness. If we concede that it would not have been competent evidence in chief on the part of the plaintiffs, the defendant having brought it out, the plaintiffs were clearly entitled to follow it up by the questions referred to.

Judgment affirmed. C.

Reference

Full Case Name
McElheny v. Pittsb. etc. Ry. Co.
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Evidence — Gross-examination. When, upon the cross-examination of a witness, the opposite party has introduced a subject germane to the issue on trial, and has elicited some facts respecting it, the party calling the witness may, upon redirect examination, follow it up by inquiring for further facts explanatory of those so elicited, even though it might not have been competent to prove them upon the examination in chief.