[1] Chose in Action—Assignment—Parties.-—An assignee of a chose in action may bring suit thereon in his own name.

[2] Id.—Collision of Automobiles — Cause of Action for Negligence—Oral Assignment.—Since there is no statutory provision requiring an assignment of a claim for damages to an automobile, alleged to have resulted from negligence in a collision, to be in writing, parol evidence of the transfer is admissible.

[3] Id.—Witnesses—Testimony of Assignor.—In a suit by the assignee upon a claim so assigned, the oral testimony of the assignor himself to the effect that he has transferred his claim is sufdeient to bind the assignor and support a finding that an assignment has been made.

[4] Id.—Parties—Collateral Agreement With Reference to Recovery.—Provided the assignment in such a ease, whether verbal or written, is absolute so as to vest the apparent legal title in the assignee, the latter is entitled to sue in his own name, whatever arrangements may have been made between him and the assignor respeeting the proceeds, as the debtor is completely protected by the assignment.

[5] Id.—Interest op Third Party in Claim—Evidence—Admissibility op.—In an action by the assignee upon an assigned claim for damages to an automobile alleged to have occurred by defendant’s negligence, evidence of the interest in the claim of an insurance company in which both the assignor and assignee were insured is admissible subject to plaintiff’s connecting this interest with the present action by proof of his authorization to sue.

[6] Id.—Evidence—Appeal.—In an action upon an assigned claim where the trial court found, upon ample evidence, that plaintiff sustained the burden of proving a direct assignment- of the claim, defendant cannot upon appeal raise objection that certain evidence is lacking when his attorneys are responsible for its omission, nor can he complain that the ease was tried upon an erroneous theory when the court and parties were led into the acceptance of that theory by defendant’s own counsel.