Law Commons^™

Evidence - The Use Of Corporate Minutes In Evidence, Francis T. Goheen

Michigan Law Review

In their treatment of the principles applicable to the use of corporate minutes in evidence, the courts and the text writers have, with little or no explanation, used the language of both the parol evidence rule and the best evidence rule. Most often the question is rather summarily dismissed, and the court's opinion generally discloses very little in the way of enlightening information regarding the reasons for the exclusion or the admission and effect of the offered minutes. If general propositions are to be formulated relative to the use of corporate minutes under given conditions, such propositions must be based …

Evidence - Exceptions To Hearsay Rule - Physician's Testimony As To Statements Of Symptoms Made By Patient, Benjamin H. Dewey

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, while in the employ of the defendant, was injured when a ditch he was engaged in digging caved in upon him. Defendant alleged that the shock made active theretofore dormant pulmonary tuberculosis. He received treatment from a physician at the time of the injury. Upon plaintiff's suit under the Texas Workmen's Compensation Act, the physician was allowed to testify, over defendant's objection, that about a month and a half after the injury, the plaintiff had come to the physician's office, and reported that his sputum was stained with blood. On appeal, it was held, one judge dissenting, that …

Presumptions, Edmund M. Morgan

Washington Law Review

Every writer of sufficient intelligence to appreciate the difficulties of the subject-matter has approached the topic of presumptions with a sense of hopelessness and has left it with a feeling of despair. The great Thayer attempted to bring order out of chaos by reducing the entire doctrine to a simple formula, for which he had very little authority in the judicial decisions, and which for a long time received no real judicial sanction but which later received much lip-service and recently has been rigorously applied in a few cases. Wigmore has been content to accept Thayer almost without qualification. Both …

Admissions, Edmund M. Morgan

Washington Law Review

In Greenleaf's first edition, he adopted the dictum of Mascardus that an admission is not evidence but a substitute for proof. This was repeated in the first fourteen editions following, was copied by Taylor, was accepted by Wharton, apparently acquiesced in by Thayer, and later strenuously insisted upon by Professor Gifford at Columbia. Unless the dictum be given the interpretation put upon it by Gifford, that it takes the place of proof so long as the jury does not disbelieve it, it would seem to mean that an extra-judicial admission stands on the same basis as an admission made in …

Evidence--Incompetency Of Witnesses--Time Of Objection, M. E. L., E. W. E.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Res Gestae, Edmund M. Morgan

Washington Law Review

A multitude of cases creates chaos in this subject. Even so great a scholar and lawyer as Simon Greenleaf was unable to clarify the topic when the decisions were fewer and simpler. Mr. (afterwards Mr. Justice) Pitt Taylor, the author of Taylor on Evidence, copied Greenleaf word for word; but when in controversy with Mr. Chief Justice Cockburn over Bedinglield's case, had to confess that his text consisted of words "full of sound, signifying nothing". He insisted, however, that the definition which the Chief Justice had framed left him "enveloped in a fog, dense as that by which I am …

Evidence - Curative Admissibility, Theodore R. Vogt

Michigan Law Review

If one party be permitted, for any reason, to introduce inadmissible evidence, may his opponent counter with like evidence to offset any· advantage the former may have obtained? Or, as Dean Wigmore puts it: "Does one inadmissibility justify or excuse another?"

The problem is again brought to notice by the decision of the Iowa Supreme Court in the recent case of Maasdam v. Jefferson County Farmers' Mutual Insurance Association. In that case the lower court was reversed because it refused to permit the defendant to introduce evidence as to the market value of the insured articles after plaintiff had …

The Hearsay Rule, Edmund M. Morgan

Washington Law Review

Any attempt to define a legal concept makes advisable an inquiry into its origin and evolution. If it be a substantive law concept, the social purpose that is designed to serve—whether the avoidance of evils or the creation or furtherance of positive benefits—must be considered. If it be a concept of procedural law, the functions it is, or is thought to be, designed to perform in the process of reaching the factual and legal bases for satisfactory determination of disputes between litigants must be examined. It is proposed, therefore, first to look briefly at the causes which brought the hearsay …

Taxation-Proceeding Before United States Board Of Tax Appeals -Validity Of Subpoena Duces Tecum - Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Royal E. Thompson

Michigan Law Review

In a proceeding for judicial process to compel defendant to obey a subpoena duces tecum issued by the United States Board of Tax Appeals, defendant asserted that the documents called for were irrelevant to the issue involved, and that the subpoena was a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Federal Constitution. Held, a witness is not entitled to resist a subpoena for mere incompetency or irrelevancy. To question admissibility, the papers must be so manifestly irrelevant as to make it plain that it is a mere "fishing expedition." One paragraph of the subpoena was declared invalid, as lacking …