Opinion ID: 2085682
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Violated Stipulation.

Text: The trial court permitted the defendant, Mr. Schmidt, to testify in contradiction to what his attorney had previously stipulated. The comment on the record made by the trial judge in ruling upon the objection makes it clear that he regarded the stipulation of the defendants' counsel to be conditional, and when the grounds upon which that condition rested became infirm, the court in its discretion permitted an attack upon the stipulated exhibit. The circumstances of the stipulation and its subsequent attack are reflected in the following statement by the trial court: . . . Mr. Regan asked Mr. Strnad whether the photograph was taken on the date represented by Mr. Strnad, and Mr. Strnad represented to Mr. Regan that it was, and upon that representation, the stipulation accrued. Now, it appears that there is a dispute by Mr. Regan's client and witness with respect to the correctness of the representation made by Mr. Strnad that the exhibit was taken and the photograph was taken on March 3. The court thereupon permitted Mr. Schmidt to repudiate the stipulation, and we consider that it was in the discretion of the trial court under these circumstances so to do.