Legal Opinion

Halley v. Tichenor

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 11, 1903Published

Appeal from Story District Court. — Host. S. M. Weaves., Judge. ActioN to recover damages for an assault and battery. Trial to a jury, verdict and judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtDeemek, J.

During the trial, defendant introduced and read in evidence a motion and affidavit for a continuance filed by plaintiff at a previous term of court. This was objected to, but the objection was overruled; the court remarking that “the Supreme Court says it is in evidence and it can be read.” This ruling was correct. Cross v. Garrett, 35 Iowa, 480; Asbuch v. C. B. da Q. R. R., 86 Iowa, 101.

II. A witness was not permitted to answer a question as to whether or not plaintiff made complaint of pain. The ruling is not argued, and we need not give it further attention.

III. A leading question was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. StanleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
  2. Asbach v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1892
  3. Cross v. GarrettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
  4. State v. McCombsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
  5. State v. GrindenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API