Opinion ID: 2431316
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Facts of the Impeachment

Text: On direct examination, defendant Dulaney testified that as he entered the curve behind defendant Travagliante they were both going below the speed limit of 55 miles-per-hour. On cross-examination, he repeated that defendant Travagliante was going 40-50 miles-per-hour on a straight stretch before the curve. Plaintiff then asked defendant Dulaney whether he had ever told anybody that defendant Travagliante failed to stop or slow down and that contributed to cause this collision. Defendant Dulaney answered, I didn't say that. In response to plaintiff's further cross-examination, defendant Dulaney testified that he was not telling the jury that defendant Travagliante failed to slow down or failed to stop or that his failure caused the collision. He continued his testimony on cross-examination by stating that defendant Travagliante certainly was not driving at a high rate of speed and was not driving at an excessive rate of speed. Plaintiff's counsel then stated to the court he wished to refresh the witness's memory [2] with a cross-claim the witness had filed against defendant Travagliante. Counsel for defendant Travagliante objected, [3] claiming that the pleadings cannot be used to impeach because the parties have the right to plead in the alternative. The objection was overruled, and plaintiff's attorney was permitted to read the following to the jury: Defendant Steven Dulaney states that whatever injuries or damages plaintiff may have sustained were directly and proximately caused in whole or in part by the carelessness and negligence of defendant Travagliante in one or more of the following respects: that he carelessly and negligently drove and operated his vehicle at an excessive and high rate of speed for the conditions then and there existing; that he knew or by the highest degree of care should have known that there was a reasonable likelihood of collision in time thereafter to have stopped, swerved, or slackened his speed, sounded a warning, or a combination thereof, but he failed to do so. Plaintiff's counsel then asked defendant Dulaney whether his lawyer had filed this pleading as a counterclaim on behalf of defendant Dulaney. Defendant Dulaney answered, I have no idea. This is the first time I have ever heard of it. I did not know that I was counterclaiming. Those certainly are not my statements, sir.