Eggers v. Norwood Industrial Loan Co.
Eggers v. the Norwood Industrial Loan Co.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION PER CURIAM Two points of error are stressed in this *351 appeal: First: That the court erred in refusing defendant the right to cross-examine plaintiff’s attorney regarding his interest in the case. The court erred in so doing. The attorney was on the stand giving evidence in favor of plaintiff and his interest in the case by way of a contingent fee, if such was the basis of his employment, was a proper subject for cross-examination as bearing upon his credibility. Second: The court is further of the opinion that the verdict and judgment are manifestly against the weight of the evidence. We will not comment on the evidence as the case will have to be retried.
The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for a new trial and further proceedings according to law.
BOSS, PJ, HAMILTON & MATTHEWS, JJ, concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.