McAllister v. Boston Housing Authority, 429 Mass. 300 (1999)

Citation: McAllister v. Boston Housing Authority, 429 Mass. 300 (1999)
Parent Document: McAllister v. Boston Housing Authority, 429 Mass. 300 (1999)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 1999-04-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6577848/mcallister-v-boston-housing-authority/ ↗

Full Text

1,091 chars

On redirect examination, the plaintiff’s counsel sought to rehabilitate the plaintiff by introducing other portions of the deposition testimony under the doctrine of verbal completeness. Over the defendant’s objection, the plaintiff’s counsel was allowed to read the next several lines of the deposition testimony. This testimony described the plaintiff’s problems with the work order system. The plaintiff’s counsel then sought to introduce additional portions of the plaintiff’s deposition testimony, under the doctrine of verbal completeness.3 The judge sustained the defendant’s objection, reasoning that the plaintiff’s counsel was required to object, under the doctrine of verbal completeness, at the time the deposition was originally used by the defendant. *303According to the plaintiff, she was prejudiced because the statements introduced by the defendant were taken out of context and the jurors were given a false and misleading impression of a material fact. The plaintiff further contends that the proffered statements would have allowed counsel to rehabilitate the plaintiff.

Other Sections in This Document (25)

Full Text