Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
The Theory Of Criminal Discovery And The Practice Of Criminal Law, David W. Louisell
The Theory Of Criminal Discovery And The Practice Of Criminal Law, David W. Louisell
Vanderbilt Law Review
To crystallize in a few words the motif of a career as varied and comprehensive as that of Eddie Morgan would in any event be difficult, but it is doubly so for a life devoted, as his has been, to stuff as vital and dynamic as procedure and evidence. For me, his work most fundamentally is to be characterized as a quest for greater rationality in the adjudicative process. Whether one thinks of his analysis of the hearsay rule,' or his rationale of the admissions exception to it, or his treatment of the dead man's statute, or his study of …
Book Reviews, Robert N. Cooks (Reviewer), Kenneth B. Hughs (Reviewer), Jess Halstead (Reviewer), Walter P. Armstrong, Jr. (Reviewer), Howard J. Graham (Reviewer)
Book Reviews, Robert N. Cooks (Reviewer), Kenneth B. Hughs (Reviewer), Jess Halstead (Reviewer), Walter P. Armstrong, Jr. (Reviewer), Howard J. Graham (Reviewer)
Vanderbilt Law Review
Current Legal Problems 1956 Edited by G. W. Keeton and G. Schwarzenberger London: Stevens & Sons, 1956. Pp. vii, 275. $5.55
reviewer: David F. Maxwell
===================================
Some Problems of Proof under the Anglo-American System of Litigation By Edmund Morris Morgan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1956. Pp. xii, 195. $3.50
reviewer: Charles T. McCormick
===================================
Effective Drafting of Leases with Check List and Forms By Milton N. Lieberman Newark: Gann Law Books, 1956. Pp. viii, 974
reviewer: Robert N. Cooks
===================================
The Law and One Man Among Many By Arthur E. Sutherland Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1956. Pp. ix, …
Rules Of Evidence -- Substantive Or Procedural?, Edmund M. Morgan
Rules Of Evidence -- Substantive Or Procedural?, Edmund M. Morgan
Vanderbilt Law Review
It hardly needs stating that the definition of a legal word or term depends upon the purpose for which it is to be defined. If in framing a generalization designed to state a rule or make a discrimination applicable in a specific topic or field of the law, the courts use specified terms, it by no means follows that they intend those terms to be understood in the same sense in generalizations dealing with problems in another topic or field. The words, substance or substantive and procedure or procedural, have been used most frequently in three separate situations: (1) in …