Volume 8 — Washington Appellate Reports

<bold>[1] Witnesses — Cross-examination — Managing Agent of Adverse</bold> <bold>Party — What Constitutes.</bold> For purposes of CR 43(b) which permits a party to cross-examine the managing agent of an adverse party, <italic>i.e.,</italic> treat him as though he had been called as an adverse witness, a managing agent is one who acts with superior authority and has been given general control to exercise some degree of discretion on behalf of his principal as to the particular subject matter of the litigation, and who can be expected to identify himself with the interests of his principal rather than those of the other party. [See 58 Am. Jur., Witnesses (1st ed. § 560).] <bold>[2] Witnesses — Cross-examination — Managing Agent of Adverse</bold> <bold>Party — Hostility — Necessity.</bold> It is not necessary under CR 43(b), permitting the use of leading questions in interrogating a managing agent of the adverse party, to show hostility. <bold>[3] Witnesses — Cross-examination — Managing Agent of Adverse</bold> <bold>Party — Former Agent.</bold> CR 43(b) gives a party an absolute right to call as an adverse witness only the current managing agents of an adverse party; the adversity of a former managing agent of an adverse party depends upon the trial court's discretionary determination of hostility. <bold>[4] Witnesses — Cross-examination — Managing Agent of Adverse</bold> <bold>Party — Determination.</bold> Under CR 43(b), a determination by the trial court that a witness is a managing agent of the adverse party is discretionary, but once that determination is made, that witness must be subject to cross-examination, contradiction, and impeachment in the same manner as if he had been called by the adverse party.

<bold>[1] Bail — Forfeiture of Bail Bond — Review — Scope.</bold> A trial court's refusal to vacate the forfeiture of a bail bond will not be overturned on appeal absent a flagrant abuse of discretion by the trial judge. [See Ann. 84 A.L.R. 420; 8 Am.Jur.2d, Bail and Recognizance §§ 166, 206.] <bold>[2] Bail — Forfeiture of Bail Bond — Discretion of Trial Court.</bold> It is not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to vacate the forfeiture of bail bond merely because the bondsman has exercised diligence in searching for the defendant or because the charges against the defendant were eventually dismissed, where the defendant is not returned until after the period of a stay of execution has run.