Burnam, 111 Okl
«* * * Offered, you to in every instances when the house or property was gotten because of the joint world off husband and wife throughout the coverture, and there is no problem, the whole house will go to the survivor, during the whoever dying, or no of one’s said assets are, one-50 % of instance assets will check out the heirs of your husband plus one-50 % of for the heirs of your partner, according to best out-of symbolization.»
¶18 This new trial legal made judgment adding therein these findings and you can results, and you will therein found and you can adjudged one to Lena had passed down the complete demand for the house or property, that tend to away from Lena, supra, got thrown away said assets from the devising the same so you’re able to Alexander Linder Seay, and you may quieted identity resistant to the defendants in favor of plaintiff.
¶19 In advance of proceeding in order to one factor of these propositions regarding error we have been required to influence inside the losing that it notice i direct awareness of the next points and you can laws and regulations out of laws.
¶20 The latest parties towards action don’t question the brand new validity or the court sufficiency of the deeds so you’re able to import the brand new identity on the possessions so you can Roentgen.D. Payne.
¶21 Into the Lindsay Condition Financial v. 74, 219 P. 904, we stored the consideration clause into the a deed off conveyance was conclusive for the purpose of offering perception to your surgical words of your own deed; but also for some other mission it is offered to reasons by parol facts, that is prima-facie proof just of the number, kind, and acknowledgment of thought, and you can parol evidence try admissible to display just what real attention are. Pick along with Webb v. 248, 239 P. 653; Tayiah v. Bunnell, 77 Okl. 40, 186 P. 240; Kirkpatrick v. Jacobson’s Life Houses, Inc., Okl., 467 P.2d 489.
¶23 The entire rule is the fact that the testimony in what a dead people said through the their existence try hearsay and it is not rendered competent from the fact that new declarant has died since such as declaration is made. Slater v. Common Work with Fitness & Crash Assn., Okl., 393 P.2d 838.
¶twenty four The fresh report regarding Lena your Hendersons relevant within testimony was developed following the death of Roentgen.D. Payne and may not have become built in their exposure. It had been therefore inadmissible for this further reason. Understand the Slater situation, 393 P.2d 839, at the p. 842, and you may Shaw v. Shaw, Okl., 282 P.2d 748, 752.
¶twenty-five So it suppression isn’t applicable to the other testimony, supra, while the leftover statements attributed to Lena and you may Roentgen.D. Payne was related since having been produced in the current presence of both. The new results and you can judgment of your own demo court don’t have the benefit of the fresh Hendersons’ testimony.
McGrew, 96 Okl
¶twenty six Defendants urge the testimony of your own attorney James H. Ivy are subject to getting rejected in fact it is objectionable to the the quantity this prejudiced the fresh new defendants’ case.
¶twenty-seven Defendants cite to get this proposal an advisory Advice of your own Oklahoma Bar Connection Legal Integrity Panel, No. 114, searching in the webpage 96 out of an Appendix so you’re able to Oklahoma Choices, 341-343 P.2d. The view in it Code 21 away from Legislation off alua co to Top-notch Make [Canons of Elite group Ethics, cannon 19] concerning propriety of a lawyer acting as a witness for their client as well as once becoming guidance getting their customer in identical case, while offering that «Except whenever important to the stops regarding fairness, legal counsel is to stop testifying for the court into the behalf regarding their visitors.» The advice emphatically says that in the latter such as this new lawyer would be to totally withdraw regarding the situation if your situations tend to allow, and prevent uniting the smoothness regarding counsel and you may experience on the same instance.