¶1I concur because of the decision in this Court when the case was here before, but I cannot do sc without expressing my feeling that the rule is most unjust that permits a plaintiff, in such a case as this, to testify to what his wife said to the prejudice of the defendant, her.father, and will not permit her, as a witness for the defendant, to dispute such testimony.
86 Mich. 232
Edgell v. Francis
Decided June 5, 1891
Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1891-06-05
(Hooker, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion, and in the former report of .the case, found in 66 Mioh. 303.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1914
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1891-06-05
View the full empirical analysis of this case →