Evidence Commons^™

A Review Of The Proposed Michigan Rules Of Evidence, James K. Robinson, John W. Reed

Articles

On January 6, 1977, the Supreme Court of Michigan entered an order stating that it is considering adoption of the proposed Michigan Rules of Evidence which were submitted to the Court by the committee which it appointed in March 1975. The Court has solicited comments from interested persons regarding the proposed rules. A copy of the Supreme Court's order is published in this issue of the Bar Journal. The proposed rules are published in the January 26, 1977, issue of North Western Reporter, Second Series (Michigan Edition). The purpose of this article is to review in general the background and …

Instructing The Jury Upon Presumptions In Civil Cases: Comparing Federal Rule 301 With Uniform Rule 301, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Foreword: Should Wyoming Adopt These Rules?, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Dead Man's Statute Before And After The Florida Evidence Code -- A Step In The Right Direction, Linda Jones Wells

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proffitt V. State, 315 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1975), Elaine Kay Freemyer

Florida State University Law Review

Evidence- HUSBAND-WIFE PRIVILEGE- TESTIMONY OF THIRD PARTY EAVESDROPPER CONCERNING PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ADMISSIBLE WHERE PRIVILEGED PARTY KNOWS OR HAS REASON TO KNOW OF EAVESDROPPER'S PRESENCE.

"A Most Deplorable Paradox": Admitting Illegally Obtained Evidence In Georgia--Past, Present, And Future, Donald E. Wilkes Jr.

Scholarly Works

This Article explores the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence in Georgia criminal cases prior to 1961 and during the post-Mapp era and endeavors to assess the future admissibility of illegally seized evidence in Georgia under both federal and state law.

Survey Of Developments In West Virginia Law: 1975-1976, Lloyd George Jackson Ii, John Burdick Koch, Alan Dale Moats, Thomas A. Vorbach

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exclusion Of Depositions From The Jury Room: An Anachronism In Texas Rule 281., George H. Spencer Jr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract Forthcoming.

Due Process And Lay Judges, Julian T. Pierce

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Robert G. Lawson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Evidence, Robert G. Lawson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Developments In Evidence Of Other Crimes, Nickolas J. Kyser

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

If the defendant in a criminal trial has a record of other offenses or is suspected of a number of crimes although charged with only one, the admissibility of evidence of these other offenses can be crucial. Admissibility depends in part on the purpose for which the evidence is offered. For instance, the prosecution is severely limited in its use of evidence of character. Until the defendant submits evidence of his good character, the subject cannot be raised and even after character is put in issue particular acts are not allowed to show character. The defendant's prior convictions may be …

Character Evidence--The Rules Of Admissibility In Criminal Cases In Kentucky, Merle C. Clark

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

An Eclectic Approach To Impeachment By Prior Convictions, Lawrence A. Margolis

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Almost every state permits persons convicted of a crime to testify in either their own or another person's behalf. Nonetheless, these states allow evidence of a person's prior criminal conviction to be used to impeach his credibility. The use of this method of impeachment in criminal trials has been the subject of substantial adverse criticism; yet, the practice remains widespread. This article first will discuss the problems that arise from the use of prior conviction evidence for impeachment purposes in criminal trials and then will examine several proposals that would restrict the use of such evidence. Finally, the article will …

Richardson V. State: An Opportunity Missed, Jay F. Cook

Indiana Law Journal

Recent Developments in Indiana Law

Searches Without Warrants, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

My primary area of concentration today is the search made without a warrant. Studies indicate that 95 percent or more of all searches are without warrants. It is quite understandable, then, that most of the search-and-seizure litigation concerns the validity of searches without warrants.

Evidence--Medical Treatises To Be Admitted As Direct Evidence In Wisconsin--Lewandowski V. Preferred Risk Mutual Ins. Co., Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Defendant's attorney in a personal injury action sought on cross-examination to impeach plaintiff's physician regarding his determination of the degree of plaintiff's disability by referring to the medical standards set forth in the American Medical Association's Guide to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment--The Extremities and Back. Pointing to the physician's testimony that he had not relied on the Guide in making his evaluation, the trial court sustained plaintiff's objection that such cross-examination was not permissible. On appeal, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the trial court was correct in sustaining the objection in accordance with the established rule that it …

Comments And Casenotes: To Kill A Mockingbird - Star Decisis And M'Naghten In Maryland, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

There are certain pillars of jurisprudence which, despite the erosive elements of time and progress, remain sacred. After more than a century of judicial dialogue the venerable M'Naghten Rule survives as the prevailing test to determine criminal responsibility. The rule states: "To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know …

The New Michigan Pre-Trial Procedural Rules-Models For Other States?, Robert Meisenholder

Michigan Law Review

The new Michigan procedural laws are embodied in a revised set of statutes and court rules which became effective January 1, 1963, after a long period of study by a Joint Committee on Michigan Procedural Revision. They abolish an anachronistic distinction between procedures in law and equity, abrogate a scattered, disorganized set of rules and statutes, and create a unified, coherent procedural system.

A Radical Restatement Of The Law Of Seller's Damages: Michigan Results Compared, Robert J. Harris

Michigan Law Review

Conventional doctrine does not address itself directly to the choice among valuation techniques, although the various parochial damage formulae give some clues. Underlying this series of articles is an assumption that the doctrine makes more sense when restated in valuation terms. These articles involve an effort to restate in such terms one sector of expectation damage law-the part that governs cases in which plaintiff is a "seller."

Edmund M. Morgan, Sam L. Felts

Vanderbilt Law Review

Professor Morgan's subject in this Survey is Procedure and Evidence, the field of his greatest contribution to the law. Its importance cannot be overestimated; for no laws can be better than they actually work in practice. As he emphasizes, the whole purpose of the rules is specifically to define the area of dispute, and to provide the best methods for solving it. In short, the problem, the same for both the practitioner and the judge, is that of mastering the materials of the controversy. Morgan throws a flood of light upon every phase of this problem. Under his extraordinary powers …

Depositions For Discovery: The New Virginia Rule, J. Westwood Smithers

University of Richmond Law Review

Important amendments to its Rules, effective April 1, 1961, were recently adopted by the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. Perhaps the change of most interest to trial lawyers was the revision of Rule 3:23 relating to D'epositions and Discovery in Actions at Law.

Eminent Domain - Procedure - Relation Of Judge And Jury In Michigan Condemnation Proceedings, John H. Jackson S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The relationship of judge to jury in Michigan condemnation proceedings presents in many ways a merger of some of the problems and questions contained in the relationship of judge to jury in civil trials, and of court to tribunal in administrative law. Theorists as well as the practicing lawyer in Michigan and some other states" may well find in the development of the Michigan condemnation proceeding an interesting example of the growth of a procedure for adjudication, in a context of cross-fire between legislative ideas and judicial interpretation of a constitutional provision.

Admission Of Extrinsic Evidence In Cases Involving The Validity Of Statutes And Ordinances In Indiana

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Abstracts Of Recent Cases, G. H. A.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedure And Evidence -- 1958 Tennessee Survey, Edmund M. Morgan

Vanderbilt Law Review

Construction and Sufficiency on Demurrer: A pleading must be construed in the light of matters judicially noticed; an allegation of facts from which the inference of the existence of an essential fact is no more reasonable or is less reasonable than an inference of its non-existence is not the equivalent of an allegation of that essential fact. ...

Thus in an action against a Pension Board for money due, a demurrer to the bill of complaint specifying only the failure to allege a ground of recovery does not raise the question whether the decision of the Pension Board is made …

Evidence-Privilege-Use Of Privileged Accident Report To Refresh Officer's Recollection, David D. Dowd, Jr. S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a passenger in an automobile, recovered a judgment for injuries received in a collision. Defendants' motion to exclude testimony of the police officer investigating the accident as to admissions of the driver was overruled by the trial court. Defendants contended that the required accident report filed by the defendant driver was privileged by statute, and therefore the testimony of the officer was inadmissible. On appeal, held, reversed on other grounds. It was proper for the officer to testify as to the defendant driver's admissions even if it was necessary for him to refresh his recollection of these admissions …

Current Decision, Weight And Admissibility Of Chemical Tests As Evidence Of Intoxication, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Right To Inspect Memoranda Used To Revive Recollection, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Due Process--Use Of Blood Tests To Determine Intoxication Not Violative Of Due Process, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.