The fact that a will, produced at a trial of the question of its validity, has a seal upon it, is evidence on the question whether the seal was there when the will was signed.
When the law of a case is fully, accurately, and clearly stated in instructions given to the jury, and each party has an opportunity in argument to apply the law to his view of the facts, it is not error of law for the court to refuse to instruct the jury on the application of the law to particular evidence.
DOE, C. J.
The defendant having, apparently through inadvertence, omitted to ask the witnesses whether the will was sealed when it was signed, the case would have been opened, on his motion, for evidence on that point when the objection was made during the closing argument. The time when the objection was made is significant. There was evidence on the question, and the instructions were correct.
The law of insanity applicable to the case was fully stated in the charge, and each party could make an application of the law to his view of the evidence, in argument. It was not error of law for the court to refuse to make such application. P. M. L. Ins. Co. v. Clark, ante 345.
Judgment on the verdict.
CLARK, J., did not sit: the others concurred.