| Minn. | May 16, 1890

Gilfillan, C. J.

There is no merit in either assignment of error. Even had defendant been technically entitled, as a part of his cross-examination of the witness Mrs. McCarthy, to ask the questions which the court below excluded, it is apparent that he could not have been prejudiced by their exclusion. They were so manifestly immaterial that no conceivable answers that the witness might have made could in any way have affected the result.

Order affirmed.

© 2024 Midpage AI does not provide legal advice. By using midpage, you consent to our Terms and Conditions.