State v. Burlingame

Appellant asserts error in allowing leading questions. It is clear that the rule has been violated in this respect. The respondent justifies the ruling as being discretionary. These matters were within the discretion of the trial court, and we cannot say that the trial court abused that discretion in permitting leading questions.

It is claimed that the court erred in allowing the testimony of Dr. W. G. Magee:

Q. Assuming that the mother had taken certain capsules or pills once every four hours for a period of two weeks after taking the last capsule, and that the woman had felt absolutely no…