Grumley v. Webb, 48 Mo. 562 (1871)

Citation: Grumley v. Webb, 48 Mo. 562 (1871)
Parent Document: Grumley v. Webb, 48 Mo. 562 (1871)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 1871-10-15
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8046745/grumley-v-webb/ ↗

Full Text

910 chars

Broadhead not only testified that Krum “wanted” to include the second suit, and that he “understood” it to be included, but he says, with emphasis, that the second suit was in fact included, and that Krum insisted upon having it so. He says: “Judge Krum insisted upon a settlement of the whole thing. I am CONFIDENT OF THAT. I YIELDED TO THAT.” Again he testifies that he explained to Grumley the receipt evidencing this sweeping settlement, reducing it to a moral certainty that Grumley was apprised of its true character. All this evidence is dropped out of what is represented to be “ all the material parts ” of Broad-head’s testimony. It would have been quite as accurate to have presented the part left out, and then held that up as being all that was material. It is not the number of words a witness uses *614that renders his testimony important, but the number and character of the facts he discloses.

Other Sections in This Document (174)

Full Text