Law Commons^™

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …

Tort Law As Corrective Justice: A Pragmatic Justification For Jury Adjudication, Catharine Pierce Wells

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this article is to develop a pragmatic analysis of corrective justice that will serve as a partial justification for current practices of tort adjudication. Part I discusses the concept of corrective justice and explores its relationship to the problem of justifying tort law. Part II argues that certain contemporary theories of corrective justice fail to provide an adequate basis for regarding individual tort outcomes as just. Part III develops a pragmatic account of corrective justice and argues that it accurately describes current practices of tort adjudication. Finally, Part IV argues that these practices are justified in the …

The Child Sexual Abuse Literature: A Call For Greater Objectivity, John E.B. Myers

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Accusations of Child Sexual Abuse by Hollida Wakefield and Ralph Underwager., The Battle and the Backlash: The Child Sexual Abuse War by David Hechler., On Trial: America's Courts and Their Treatment of Sexually Abused Children by Billie Wright Dziech and Chales B. Schudson.

Advising A Witness To Exercise His Privilege Against Self-Incrimination When The Adviser's Motive Is To Protect Himself Is An Obstruction Of Justice-Cole V. United States, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, who had perjured himself before a federal grand jury, feared that the testimony of his former employee before the same body would reveal the perjury. Knowing that the employee had previously filed a false affidavit with the McClellan Committee, defendant was able to persuade him to invoke his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. When the former employee later voluntarily made a full disclosure to government agents, defendant was indicted by a second grand jury and convicted of corruptly endeavoring to obstruct the administration of justice in violation of section 1503 of the Federal Criminal Code. On appeal to the Court …

Criminal Law-Reiterated Contempt Of Court, Robert C. Bonges

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was found guilty of criminal contempt of court in a civil proceeding for giving "don't remember" answers, after having been granted immunity from prosecution, to questions concerning his activities, asked during a grand jury investigation of an attempted homicide. For his refusal to testify, the defendant was given the maximum penalty provided for criminal contempt under the applicable statute. After paying the fine and serving the sentence, the defendant was brought before the same grand jury thirty-five days later and was asked the same questions. The defendant repeated the "don't remember" answers and was again fined and incarcerated. …

Evidence-Hearsay-Exclusion Of Self-Serving Declarations, John M. Price S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

One of the most venerable of all legal principles is the evidentiary rule excluding hearsay. This rule, which was first espoused by the English courts in the sixteenth century, arose when it became apparent that there was an inherent danger of untrustworthiness in a witness's uncorroborated recital of a prior declaration made outside the courtroom. The courts gave several reasons for regarding hearsay as untrustworthy. First, these statements, offered into evidence for the truth of the matter asserted, were not made under oath. Secondly, objection to such testimony was raised because the trier of fact had no opportunity to pass …

Betts V. Brady Twenty Years Later: The Right To Counself And Due Process Values, Yale Kamisar

Michigan Law Review

I am quite distressed by talk that the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio "suggests by analogy" that the Court may now overrule Betts v. Brady. For whether one talks about the fourth or the sixth amendment, there is much to be said for Justice Harlan's dissenting views in Mapp. "[W]hatever configurations ... have been developed in the particularizing federal precedents" should not be "deemed a part of 'ordered liberty,' and as such ... enforceable against the States .... [W]e would not be true to the Fourteenth Amendment were we merely to stretch the general principle [ of …

Packer: Ex-Communist Witnesses, Malcolm Sharp

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Ex-Communist Witnesses. By Herbert L. Packer

Federal Agency Investigations: Procedural Rights Of The Subpoenaed Witness, Frank C. Newman

Michigan Law Review

This article is designed to help fill a gap in the literature and to warn government attorneys, particularly, about some questionable asides in the Hannah case. We shall not deal with record-keeping requirements or with agency inspections, subpoenas duces tecum, and related search and seizure problems. The focus instead is on the subpoenaed witness; that is, a man who knows that force may be used against him unless pursuant to government command he appears and answers questions. We examine several rights that may protect the witness; and we shall also ask whether the agencies, to discharge their governmental duties, truly …

Federal Agency Investigations: Requirements For The Production Of Documents, Frank E. Cooper

Michigan Law Review

The United States district courts are frequently called upon to decide whether an administrative agency is entitled to enforcement of a subpoena requesting production of documentary evidence which the person to whom the subpoena is addressed assails as an unnecessary and improper inquisitorial investigation.

Neither the statute nor the decision-landmarks though they both are-offers a convenient rule of thumb to guide the district courts in the intensely difficult problems posed by requests for enforcement of administrative subpoenas.

However, an examination of the decisions passing upon such requests does disclose the standards by which the courts apply the three classic tests, …

Constitutional Law - Due Process And Right Of Confrontation- Jencks Act, Robert J. Margolin S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The Jencks Act like the rule it purportedly reaffirmed, was designed to insure "justice." Although the stated purpose of the act was to preserve the rights of any defendant under due process of law, the question remains unresolved whether, in articulating the rule in terms of "justice," the Court in Jencks v. United States incorporated it into the requirements of due process. To be sure, the underlying intent of both the Court and Congress is unclear, but of far more concern than the intent is whether the Jencks Act, in fact, violates the constitutional mandates of the Fifth and Sixth …

Evidence - Character Testimony - Impeachment Through Reference To Prior Specific Acts Of Defendant, Lawrence E. Blades S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, on trial for arson, presented a character witness who testified that defendant's reputation in the community was good. During cross-examination the prosecutor asked if the witness had heard that defendant had been arrested for or convicted of various specific crimes in other states. No objection was made by the defense, and the trial judge took no action. The witness answered no to each question, and subsequently a jury verdict of guilty was returned. On appeal, held, reversed and remanded, three judges dissenting. Failure of the trial judge, before allowing such cross-examination, to ascertain on his own motion and …

Negligence - Damages - Mental Anguish From Witnessing Peril Of Third Party, Mark Shaevsky

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiffs (husband, wife, and three children) incurred physical injuries and a fourth child was burned to death in an automobile collision with the defendant's vehicle. Plaintiffs claimed compensation for mental anguish sustained from witnessing the death of the child. Defendant's motion to strike the allegations of mental suffering, held, granted. Defendant owes no legal duty to protect plaintiffs from mental suffering caused by viewing another in peril. Lessard v. Tarca, (Conn. Super. 1957) 133 A. (2d) 625.

Evidence - Examination Of Witnesses - Surprise As Grounds For Impeaching A Party's Own Witness, John A. Ziegler, Jr. S.Ed., Raymond Dittrich

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was convicted of the statutory rape of his stepdaughter. Immediately following the alleged offense, the victim had signed a statement accusing the defendant of the crime charged. Before the trial, however, the district attorney was advised by the defense counsel, and by the victim herself, that the written statement was not true. At the trial, when called as a witness by the commonwealth, the girl repudiated her earlier statement, whereupon the district attorney pleaded surprise and was permitted to use the prior statement to impeach. On appeal, held, affirmed. The district attorney was "actually surprised" when the …

Wills - Execution - Attestation, Max H. Bergman

Michigan Law Review

Prospective witnesses to a will saw the testatrix standing in an adjoining room engaged in writing. Soon thereafter, the testatrix asked them to come in and sign a paper. Her name had already been written on the document, and she neither signed it in the witnesses' presence nor in any manner indicated the writing to be her will. The witnesses read enough of the document, however, to know it was a will, before subscribing it in the presence of the testatrix and one another. Three of the testatrix' sons objected to the probate of the will on the ground that …

Legislation - Federal Criminal Procedure - Modification Of Jencks Decision, Raymond J. Dittrich, Jr. S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was convicted of a violation of 18 U.S.C. §1001. During the trial, the court denied defendant's motion to order the government to produce for defendant's inspection reports submitted by government witnesses to government agents. The reports dealt with the same subject about which these witnesses later testified. The court of appeals affirmed the decision. On certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, held, reversed, one justice dissenting. The government has a privilege to refuse to surrender statements made by its prospective witnesses, but it may claim the privilege only at the expense of a dismissal of its case …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

Besides the two specific problems which the new federal act presents, namely, whether it imposes nonjudicial functions on federal courts, and whether it should, does and can protect against the substantial danger of state prosecution, there is a general objection that one can raise against it, and to other acts of the same type: they relate to the area of belief and opinion, the very area which was involved when the English people, spearheaded by the Puritans, engaged in the struggle with the Crown that finally resulted in the establishment of a right of silence. At least if we are …

Constitutional Law - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination -Effect Of Immunity Statute, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner was brought before a federal grand jury and questioned as to his and other persons' membership in the Communist Party. After petitioner refused to answer the questions on the ground that the answers would be self-incriminating and therefore his refusal was privileged under the Fifth Amendment, the United States attorney, proceeding under the provisions of the Immunity Act of 1954, filed an application in the United States district court requesting that petitioner be required to answer the questions. The district court, upholding the constitutionality of the act, ordered petitioner to answer the questions, and petitioner's appeal from this order …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

At the last term the United States Supreme Court in Ullmann v. United States upheld the constitutionality of paragraph (c) of a federal act of August 1954 which seeks to compel the testimony of communists and other political deviants. Paragraph (c) relates to witnesses before federal courts and grand juries. The Court specifically left open the question of the validity of paragraphs (a) and (b) relating to congressional witnesses. Justice Frankfurter delivered the Court's opinion. Justice Douglas, with the concurrence of Justice Black, wrote a dissent.

It is our purpose to consider the background, history and terms of this compulsory …

Discovery-Attorney-Client Privilege-Statements By Client To Insurer Before Attorney Employed, Colvin A. Peterson, Jr. S. Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, suing for personal injuries suffered in an automobile collision, sought discovery of statements made by defendant to his insurer, both before and after an attorney had been employed by the insurer pursuant to its contract with defendant. Defendant contended that such statements were within the attorney-client privilege. On appeal from an order denying discovery, held, affirmed. The statements were intended as a communication by defendant to the attorney ultimately to be retained for him by his insurer, and the insurer was the agent of defendant to transmit the statements to the attorney when selected. Hollien v. Kaye, …