Plumb v. Curtis
Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
33 A. 998 (1895)
Relevant factsFree
Hanford Plumb (plaintiff) sued Lewis Curtis (defendant) to recover payment for materials Simeon Plumb allegedly bought on Curtis's behalf as his agent; Curtis admitted past agency purchases but denied this particular one. Plumb testified he would not have extended credit if Simeon were buying for himself, since he knew Simeon had poor credit, and the jury found for Plumb; Curtis appealed, challenging the admissibility of that testimony.
IssueFree
Whether evidence substantiating a party's allegation to any reasonable degree is relevant and admissible.