Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 121 - 136 of 136

Full-Text Articles in Law

Attorney And Client - Disbarment - False Testimony Jan 1932

Attorney And Client - Disbarment - False Testimony

Michigan Law Review

A, an attorney, as a witness for his client in a suit against the latter, testified falsely under oath with knowledge of the fact. In proceedings for disbarment, during which A admitted the falsity of his testimony, held, his conduct warranted suspension from the bar for one year. Green v. State Bar ( Cal. 1931 ) 2 Pac. ( 2d) 340.


Decency At The Bar Dec 1931

Decency At The Bar

Michigan Law Review

One day, during the trial of the notorious Al Capone in the Federal Building in Chicago, immediately after an adjournment, officers stepped up to a man by the name of D'Andrea in the corridor outside the court room and removed from his person a business-like looking gun. The gentleman so unburdened is said to have been Mr. Capone's bodyguard, his attendant inside and outside the court room. After that, Mr. Capone had to get along without that particular guardian, for Judge Wilkerson, before whom the trial was conducted, ordered the henchman confined in jail. After the main case had been …


Crimes-Influence From The Defendants Failure To Testify Apr 1931

Crimes-Influence From The Defendants Failure To Testify

Michigan Law Review

The testimony given on a trial for murder indicated that the defendant had shot and killed one of his pursuers while fleeing the scene of a robbery in which he had taken a principal part. The trial court instructed the jury that the defendant, while not compellable, was competent to be a witness in his own behalf; and that although his failure to take the stand raised no presumption of his guilt, if facts were testified to which were accusations against the defendant which he could by his oath deny, and he failed to take the stand in his own …


Evidence-Ballistics As Subject Matter Of Expert Testimony Feb 1931

Evidence-Ballistics As Subject Matter Of Expert Testimony

Michigan Law Review

W, among other things a professional expert witness and a ballistics expert, testified that the bullet found in the body of the deceased was fired from the gun identified as being that of the defendant. Held, the evidence was properly admitted. People v. Fisher et al. (Ill. 1930) 172 N.E. 743.


The Supreme Court's Construction Of The Self-Incrimination Clause, Edward S. Corwin Dec 1930

The Supreme Court's Construction Of The Self-Incrimination Clause, Edward S. Corwin

Michigan Law Review

The second pivotal decision of the court in construction of the self-incrimination clause is that in Counselman v. Hitchcock, decided in 1892. An advantageous approach to it is furnished by certain earlier state and federal court decisions applying the common law regarding the privilege of witnesses.


Privileged Communication Between Attorney And Client-Question Of Whether The Relation Exists Left To Jury-Party Allowed To Assign Error On Ruling Violating The Privilege, Victor H. Lane Jan 1920

Privileged Communication Between Attorney And Client-Question Of Whether The Relation Exists Left To Jury-Party Allowed To Assign Error On Ruling Violating The Privilege, Victor H. Lane

Articles

This procedure was justified in the opinion in State v. Snook (Court of Errors and "Appeals of N. J., 1920), 109 Atl. 289. Snook was on trial for manslaughter charged as having been committed by the reckless driving of an automobile. After the act, Mimmick, one of the persons in the automobile, and afterward a witness for the defense, went to an attorney and had some conversation with him, the substance of which, as testified to by the attorney, was a recital by M. of what had occurred and an inquiry by him of the attorney as to what he …


Witness--Competency Of An Allopathic Expert In The Field Of Homeopathy--Opinion On Very Fact The Jury Must Determine, Victor H. Lane Jan 1919

Witness--Competency Of An Allopathic Expert In The Field Of Homeopathy--Opinion On Very Fact The Jury Must Determine, Victor H. Lane

Articles

Van Sickle v. Doolittle, (Ia., 1918), 169 N. W. 141, was an action for malpractice against a physician of the homeopathic school of medicine. Upon the trial, a physician of the allopathic school was called, and after testifying that he was unskilled in the science of homeopathy, was allowed to testify that the treatment shown to have been given to the patient by defendant, would produce no physiological effect, and that proper treatment required the giving of such medicines as would produce such effect. This was held error upon the ground that the defendant was called to treat the patient …


Contract Of Infant--Evidence, Competency Of Witness Under Survivorship Statute, Victor H. Lane Jan 1918

Contract Of Infant--Evidence, Competency Of Witness Under Survivorship Statute, Victor H. Lane

Articles

Two questions are presented by the case of Sigiaigo v. Signaigo, (Mo. 1918), 205 S. W. Rep. 23: First, the enforcibility of the contract of an infant, fully performed by her, to live with a man and his wife as their adopted child so long as they should live, in consideration that the infant should have all the property of the foster parents upon their death; and Second, the competency of the consenting mother of the infant to testify in support of the infant's claim.


Safeguarding The Criminal Defendant, Edson R. Sunderland Jan 1917

Safeguarding The Criminal Defendant, Edson R. Sunderland

Articles

Every now and then a new attack is made somewhere in the United States upon the rule prohibiting comment before the jury upon the fact that the defendant in a criminal case has not testified as a witness in his own behalf. At the present time an effort of this kind is being made in the Michigan legislature, and the introduction of the bill drew quite a little storm of protest from the State press as a dangerous inroad upon our ancient guarantees of personal liberty and security. In fact, however, it directly touches nothing more ancient than a statutory …


The Federal Constitution Is Not Violated By A State Law Compelling One Accused Of Crime To Testify Against Himself, James H. Brewster Jan 1909

The Federal Constitution Is Not Violated By A State Law Compelling One Accused Of Crime To Testify Against Himself, James H. Brewster

Articles

A case has been recently decided by the Supreme Court of Colorado, upon a condition of facts which it seems, has not an exact parallel in any of the reports. After being in litigation for more than eleven years the question involved was finally settled by the court of last resort of that state. In effect the decision goes to the extent of saying, that when a note is endorsed specially and afterwards comes back to the party making such special endorsement, and the party reissues the same without striking out his endorsement, no new endorsement is necessary, since the …


Waiver Of The Statutory Protection To The Confidential Relation Of Physician And Patient, Harry B. Hutchins Jan 1907

Waiver Of The Statutory Protection To The Confidential Relation Of Physician And Patient, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

Waiver of the Tatutory Protection of the Confidential Relation of Physician and Patient.--The subject of the disclosure by the physician upon the witness stand of confidential communications between himself and his patient has already received attention in this journal: 2 MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW, p.687; 3 MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW, p. 311. The case of Long v. Garey Investment Company, decided by the Iowa Supreme Court December 15, 1906, may be briefly noticed, as it discusses a phase of the subject in regard to which the courts are not in entire harmony, namely, the waiver of the privilege that the statute confers.


The Compensation Of Medical Witnesses, Harry B. Hutchins Jan 1906

The Compensation Of Medical Witnesses, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

The power to compel testimony is inherent in every court, for without it justice could constantly be thwarted. Generally all persons may be compelled to give evidence that is relevant to the matter in controversy. If, therefore, a person who has been duly summoned as a witness at a particular trial absents himself therefrom, without just cause, or attending, refuses to give evidence or to answer questions when directed so to do by the court, he is liable to punishment for contempt.1 But there are limitations upon the general rule, some based upon principles of legal policy and some upon …


The Investigation Of Corporate Monopolies, Edson R. Sunderland Jan 1906

The Investigation Of Corporate Monopolies, Edson R. Sunderland

Articles

The Supreme Court of the United States has recently given a clear and brief statement of its views respecting the right of a corporation officer to refuse to testify on the ground that his testimony may subject the corporation to a criminal prosecution. Hale v. Henkel, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 370. Hale was summoned before a grand jury in a proceeding under the Sherman anti-trust act, and upon being interrogated respecting certain transactions of the MacAndrews & Forbes Co., of which he was Secretary and Treasurer, refused to answer, on the ground that the Federal immunity law was not broad …


Examination Of The Medical Expert, Harry B. Hutchins Jan 1905

Examination Of The Medical Expert, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

The expert witness differs essentially from the ordinary witness in at least two particulars; first, in that the field of his testimony is outside the range of ordinary knowledge and experience; and, secondly, in that his testimony in the great majority of cases is in the form of opinions or conclusions that are deemed necessary for the proper guidance of the jury. It goes without saying that the 'lawyer who undertakes the examination of the expert should have such familiarity with the subject of inquiry as will enable him to develop it through the expert logically and clearly, but unfortunately …


The Physician As An Expert, Harry B. Hutchins Jan 1904

The Physician As An Expert, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

Expert evidence is evidence of a scientific or technical character in regard to a matter that is outside the domain of ordinary experience and knowledge. The evidence is usually in the form of opinions or conclusions based upon facts that for the purposes of an opinion are assumed to be true, although it may be in regard to scientific facts. The expert is one who has had special training or opportunities in a particular subject that the ordinary witness has not enjoyed, and who has thereby acquired certain habits of judgment.that render his explanations and opinions in the field of …


Compensation Of Experts, Henry W. Rogers Dec 1882

Compensation Of Experts, Henry W. Rogers

Articles

The law relating to the compensation of experts is somewhat unsettled, and the cases are not numerous in which the subject has been considered. This very fact, however, lends additional interest to the subject, and the question is one of great importance. In some of the States the law expressly provides that when a witness is summoned to testify as an expert he shall be entitled to extra compensation. Such a provision may be found in the laws of Iowa, of North Carolina, and of Rhode Island.