Court Opinion

ID: 9844231
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 02:59:17.817266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:15:30.258551
License: Public Domain

WOOD (W. J.), J.
I concur in the judgment. The judge has a wide discretion in the conduct of the trial and for this reason I see no justification for a reversal. But in my opinion the procedure followed is subject to criticism rather than commendation. By the exercise of the right to open and close the argument the plaintiff has a decided advantage. That advantage is unduly enhanced when he is permitted to address the jury after the defendant has presented his argument and no opportunity is given the defendant to reply. . Of course, submission of the issue to the jury by stipulation without argument would be fair to both parties, but if the ease is to be argued the party making the opening argument, whether it be the plaintiff or the defendant, should be given the right to close.
Appellants’ petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied April 20, 1944.