Court Opinion

ID: 9696424
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:47:27.184733+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:22.155274
License: Public Domain

On Application for Rehearing
HARWOOD, Presiding Judge.
In his application for rehearing counsel for appellant states:
“I would like to refer you to the letter written by Dr. Kathleen Wick-man to Dr. Clare Barclift on April 8, 1958, which is made an exhibit in this case, wherein she states * *
In this connection the record shows that when this letter was offered as appellant’s Exhibit No. 2 during the reading of Dr. Barclift’s deposition, counsel for the appellee. objected thereto. During a lengthy colloquy between the court and respective counsel, the appellee’s objection to this exhibit'was withdrawn. Counsel for appellant then stated that he would like to withdraw his offer of this letter as an exhibit, but the court refused to permit such withdrawal, and counsel for appellant excepted to this action of the court. However, later during the trial, and before the case was submitted to the jury, we find the following on page 58 of the record:
“The Court: I had a little time to reflect on it and to try and find some law. I will say this, it is a highly debatable question as to whether or not it should be in or out, but I am going to take a second guess, a second ruling and rule it out. Leave it out and allow him to withdraw. Rule out, Defendant’s Exhibit No. 2; allow him to withdraw it. All right; .now, you all can go to the Jury.”
This letter was not forwarded to this court as a part of the record, presumably in view of what we have set out above.
■ Application Overruled.