Prior v. Oglesby
| Decision Date | 23 November 1905 |
| Parties | PRIOR v. OGLESBY. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Santa Rosa County; James T. Wills, Judge.
Action by E. Oglesby against T. J. Prior. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant brings error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
Whatever evidence is offered which will assist in knowing which party speaks the truth of the issues in an action is relevant, and when, to admit it, does not override other formal rules of evidence, it should be received.
Where the issue in the case was whether logs were delivered to the defendant under a contract with a third party, or whether the plaintiff delivered a portion of the logs under a contract with the defendant, and the third party had testified as a witness for the plaintiff that the defendant did not pay him for the logs hauled by the plaintiff, the defendant should be allowed to show by cross-examination of this witness that he had paid this witness for the hauling of all the logs, in contradiction of the witness, and as tending to show that the contract under which all the logs were hauled was made with the third party, and not with plaintiff.
Daniel Campbell & Son, for plaintiff in error.
The defendant in error, who was the plaintiff below, sued the plaintiff in error in an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Santa Rosa county; the declaration, filed December 7, 1903, containing the common counts for goods bargained and sold, account stated, money paid, money received, and work and materials, with a bill of particulars for hauling logs, $280.
The defendant filed his plea, 'never was indebted,' and issue being joined thereon, the cause was tried before a jury in September, 1904. There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff of $220.40, to which judgment this writ of error is taken.
I. The first assignment of error is based upon the action of the trial court in sustaining the objection of the plaintiff to the following question, propounded to the witness T. J Oglesby, upon cross-examination by defendant's attorney, to wit: 'How much had Mr. Prior paid you on these logs prior to the time he gave your the draft?' This question was objected to by the plaintiff because it was irrelevant.
The issue in the case at bar was whether the defendant had made a contract with plaintiff and owed him for hauling certain logs. The plaintiff, Elerson Oglesby, was the first witness in his own behalf, and testified that he and the witness T. J. Oglesby, known as 'Jeff Oglesby,' were brothers; that the defendant hired Elerson to haul certain logs and to deliver them to Prior's mill; that Jeff was logging for the defendant when Elerson went there to work; that Jeff and Elerson cut the logs from the same lands and hauled them to the same landing, the logs were all branded in the same brand, and that the defendant owed him for hauling a portion of the logs so delivered.
T. J (or Jeff) Oglesby, a witness for the plaintiff, testified that he made a contract with the defendant to haul logs; that he was hauling the logs before and at the time Elerson came there to haul; that he and Elerson hauled the logs from the same lands; that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Griswold v. State
...to assist the court in determining which party speaks the truth as to the contested issues. See 11 Ency. Evidence, 174; Prior v. Oglesby, 50 Fla. 248, 39 So. 593. eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh assignments of error question the admissibility of certain testimony of the witnesses A. E. L......
-
Woodruff v. Lantana Finance Corporation
... ... to be determined, the reception of this evidence cannot be ... held to be error on the ground that it is irrelevant and ... immaterial. Prior v. Oglesby, 50 Fla. 248, 39 So ... 593. In that case it was held that whatever evidence is ... offered which will assist in knowing which party ... ...
-
City of Jacksonville v. Shaffer
... ... appeared that the sole owner of a tract of property had made ... it into a subdivision, at a time prior to the time that the ... subdivision was brought into the city limits, and such owner ... and developer had laid out a system of streets and alleys ... be introduced as tending to throw light on the general ... subject being tried. Prior v. Oglesby, 50 Fla. 248, ... 39 So. 593 ... It ... follows from what has been said that the decisions of the ... court upon the trial were not ... ...
-
Deas v. State
... ... intercourse was committed with her by the defendant in the ... back part of a country church about a year prior to the ... trial. At the time of this occurrence, so the prosecuting ... witness testified, there were present her thirteen year old ... sister ... State v ... Patterson, 88 Mo. 88, 57 Am. Rep. 374. This is in ... consonance with the holding in Prior v. Oglesby, 50 ... Fla. 248, 39 So. 593, wherein it was held that whatever ... evidence is offered which will assist the jury in knowing ... which party ... ...