Rich v. Johnston
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover the balance of an account alleged to be due for pruning, spraying and treating trees on the defendant’s premises, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County and tried to the jury before Walsh, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $360, and appeal by the defendant.
Read the full summary
Action to recover the balance of an account alleged to be due for pruning, spraying and treating trees on the defendant’s premises, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County and tried to the jury before Walsh, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $360, and appeal by the defendant. The defendant paid for and was satisfied with the work done and materials furnished in pruning and spraying the trees, but denied liability for.the scraping and painting of a number of trees; and by way of second, defense alleged that the scraping and painting of the trees was done under an…
1Opinion of the CourtBeach, J.
As to the first assignment of error, the defendant’s theory is that the comment which the court made upon the impropriety of imputing dishonesty to a witness without any apparent reason for doing so, was erroneous, because the rule in this State as to attacking the credit of a witness on cross-examination, by asking about particular instances of misconduct not necessarily indicating a lack of veracity permits such questions to be asked at the discretion of the court, but requires counsel to take the answer, and does not allow him to raise an issue thereon by introducing evidence to contradict…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Shailer v. BullockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1905
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lionetti v. CoppolaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Mills v. Roto Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Keyser v. O'MearaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933