Ward v. Ward

Decided January 18, 1917

Supreme Court of Vermont · decided 1917-01-18

<p>Trial1 — Improper Argument — Disclosure of Trustee.</p> <p>The disclosure of a' trustee, though filed in the case, is no part of evidence, and a reference to its Contents, made by counsel for plaintiff during argument to the jury, is wholly unwarranted and, upon exception taken, requires a reversal.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently August 1935

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relies on Blaisdell & Barron v. Davis · Drown v. Oderkirk

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1917-01-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Powers, J.

¶1During his argument, counsel for the plaintiff told the jury that the disclosure of the trustee showed the sum of $1,300 in the Burlington Savings Bank to the defendant’s credit.. This was excepted to and requires a reversal. The disclosure of the trustee, though filed in the case, was no part of the evidence, and reference to its contents was wholly unwarranted. Blaisdell v. Davis, 72 Vt. 295, 48 Atl. 14; Drown v. Oderkirk, 89 Vt. 484, 96 Atl. 11. A reference to a defendant’s financial condition is one naturally prejudicial to his case, and we have no doubt that it had this effect in the case before us.

¶2 Reversed and remanded.