Opinion ID: 2167974
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Alleged Improper Argument.

Text: Defendant complains because counsel for plaintiff in his closing argument characterizes one of defendant's witnesses as Mr. Condemnor and Mr. Take. This witness was the defendant's right-of-way engineer. He testified that he was in charge of all land acquisitions for the defendant. He testified on cross-examination that it was his duty to conduct a complete review of all appraisals; that he made an appraisal in the case; that he reviewed his own appraisal; and that he came out 100 per cent. Under the circumstances, we consider the characterization of the witness to be fair comment. In weighing the witness' testimony the jury was entitled to take into consideration any interest he might have in the case, professional or pecuniary. Counsel did not transgress the bounds of propriety in informing them of their right. By the Court. Order reversed, and cause remanded with directions to reinstate the jury verdict and for further proceedings according to law.