Osullivan v. Simpson

1. Witnesses ? Plaintiff could not testify as to oral agreement. In action against executrix for specific performance of oral agreement allegedly made by decedent to bequeath to plaintiff a portion of property of decedent, plaintiff could not under Subdivision 3 of Section 10535, testify as to the alleged oral agreement. - Page 315 2. Evidence ? Effect of uncontroverted evidence. Generally a trial court may not disregard uncontroverted credible evidence. 3. Appeal and error ? Court did not act arbitrarily. The trial court was not acting arbitrarily in disregarding testimony of plaintiffs husband relative to the alleged agreement even though such testimony was not directly contradicted. 4. Witnesses ? Cross-examination ? Application of relevancy rule. The general rule requiring evidence to be relevant is more liberally construed in cross-examination of witnesses than in direct examination. 5. Evidence ? Cross-examination on irrelevant subjects. Generally counsel should not cross-examine an adverse witness on irrelevant subjects merely to bring out new matter, or attempt by such cross-examination to elicit something at which to direct contrary evidence, but where irrelevant matter was brought into the record by plaintiff on direct examination, permitting cross-examination on such matter was not reversible error. 6. Evidence ? Check of corporation held admissible. A check of the corporation payable to the plaintiffs husband who was the attorney in the transaction, was admissible to controvert the plaintiffs contention that her husband had not been paid for legal services performed for the decedent. 7. Appeal and error ? Presumption that irrelevant evidence not considered. In a case tried to court without a jury, the Supreme Court presumes that allegedly irrelevant evidence was not considered by trial court in making his decision. 8. Witnesses ? Admission or exclusion of collateral matters. The admission or exclusion of collateral matter is within the discretion of the trial court and where the testimony is in conflict it is not reversible error for courts to admit evidence of collateral facts to determine the credibility of the witnesses.