A plaintiff sued a defendant for defamation, asserting in her complaint that the defendant had called the plaintiff a thief in f
ront of a number of business associates. The plaintiff calls two witnesses to the stand, both of whom testify that they heard the defendant refer to the plaintiff as a thief in front of the business associates. The plaintiff does not take the stand herself. The defendant pleads truth of the statement as an affirmative defense and calls a witness to the stand. The defense witness is prepared to testify that he was a co-worker of the plaintiff when the plaintiff supplemented her income by tending bar three nights a week. The witness will testify that he saw the plaintiff take a $20 bill from the tavern's cash register and secrete the money in her pocket. The plaintiff's attorney objects. May the defense witness's testimony be allowed
Yes, the defense witness's testimony should be allowed to show substantive evidence.
<h3>Who is a plaintiff?</h3>
A plaintiff can be defined as the person who bring a case to the court of law while a defendant is the person who was accused for committing and offence by the plaintiff.
Based on the scenario the attorney should allow the defendant bring or show the evidence that will help to prove that plaintiff was in fact a thief.
Therefore the defense witness's testimony should be allowed to show substantive evidence.
I would say that this dialogue makes reference to the third option.
Explanation:
law and economics school of thought deals with the management of markets and they regulate consumption between people and how they respond to market transactions. In this example when Calvin says "Why do people inflict such nasty, sugar-coated poison on all of us?! A healthy workplace is a happy workplace"
