midpage

Trull v. TrueTrull v. True

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Jul 1, 1851
Reporters:

Testimony cannot be excluded as irrelevant, which would have a tendency, however remote, to establish the probability, or improbability of the fact in controversy.

S had signed the name of II to a promissory note. The question before the jury, was, whether II had given S authority so to do. Held, that evidence was relevant, which tended to show that H had in his hands some business operations of S, as security for liabilities, and was to have a commission upon advances made by him for S, in the prosecution of such business, and that the note was given for articles in aid of that business.

Case Details

Case Name: Trull v. True
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1851
Citation: 33 Me. 367
Court Abbreviation: Me.
Log In