Flashcards Studio

FACTS: In a civil action for damages arising from a service contract, P sues D. W, the defendant’s chief procurement officer, is not related to either party, and stands to receive a substantial annual bonus if D prevails. W testifies that the service contract was properly formed and that the invoices are genuine. There is no order disqualifying W, and he is not shown to be legally incompetent. (a) State the controlling doctrine on disqualification of witnesses on account of interest or relationship. Is W disqualified per se, or is his testimony admissible but subject to caution and possible corroboration? (b) Apply the doctrine to W’s testimony: Is his testimony about the contract and the invoices admissible? What weight should the court give to his testimony, and what corroborating evidence would be necessary to prove the service contract and the damages?