ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-EVIDENCE-PROBATIVE VALUE OF HEARSAY TESTIMONY BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

Authors

Abstract

In the recent case of Lloyd-McAlpine Logging Co. v. Whitefish (Wis. 1926) 206 N. W. 914, the plaintiff brought action to vacate the award of the Industrial Commission in favor of the children of the deceased workman, who was killed in the course of his employment with the plaintiff company. Under the Wisconsin statute (Stat. 1925, sec. 102.11 (3) (c)) in awarding compensation to the children, a showing that they were living with the deceased and that there is no surviving dependent parent, is required. The Commission, on the testimony of a witness whose expressions were mere conclusions, with no other support than pure hearsay, found this to be the fact. It was held that, although hearsay is admissible before the Commission, it cannot be made the sole basis of the findings which must be supported by some legal evidence in the record. The case naturally raises the question of the extent to which hearsay is admissible before administrative tribunals and of the probative value to be accorded it.

Recommended Citation

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-EVIDENCE-PROBATIVE VALUE OF HEARSAY TESTIMONY BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS, 24 Mich. L. Rev. 831 (1926).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol24/iss8/6