78 A. 1077 | N.H. | 1911
The administrator was properly allowed to testify to facts occurring in the lifetime of the intestate; but by testifying he did not render the testimony of the plaintiff admissible, for he was a stranger to the suit and had no right to control it. Smith v. Wells,
The plaintiff was not entitled as a matter of right to testify to facts occurring in the lifetime of the intestate. Stevens v. Moulton,
The question therefore remains whether the defendant, by finally taking the stand and testifying generally, waived his exception to the admission of the plaintiff's testimony. We think he did not. The ruling of the court permitting the plaintiff to testify, though erroneous, was the law of the trial, and the defendant was bound to recognize it as such. Batchelder v. Railway,
Exception sustained.
All concurred. *23