Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)

Citation: Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)
Parent Document: Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 1995-03-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1512354/twyman-v-johnson/ ↗

Full Text

1,046 chars

443 A.2d 558, 564 (D.C.1982) (same rule in civil case). Twyman does not contest the judge’s refusal to let Abraham testify to rebut Kane’s initial testimony (in Twyman’s case), but argues that Johnson opened the door to the rebuttal by calling Kane in her own case. The judge rejected this argument, as do we. It was Twyman’s counsel who revisited the matter of the telephone conversation by cross-examining Kane in a manner that strayed beyond the scope of the direct examination. The judge, therefore, could fairly determine that the renewed effort to rebut Kane’s denial was designed to circumvent his earlier ruling that Twyman had failed to establish surprise and so could not impeach her witness. In any event, as the judge recognized, the proposed rebuttal testimony by either Abraham or Ingraham added little to the basis Twyman had already laid for her claim that Johnson’s institution of suit had been an abuse of process — a claim, we observe, that was weakly founded in the evidence both presented and proffered. See Bown v. Hamilton,

Other Sections in This Document (110)

Full Text