•  
  •  
 

Authors

Abstract

ln an action against an employer for personal injuries, after the plaintiff had testified as to negligence of a fellow servant, his signed statement detailing a contrary account of the injury was introduced. The trial judge charged that the statement was admissible only for the purpose of contradicting the plaintiff's testimony. Held, it was admissible as a declaration against interest with probative value, as well as to impeach the plaintiff's testimony. Pub. Utilities Corp. v. Carden (Ark. 1930) 32 S.W.(2d) 1058.

Included in

Evidence Commons

Share

COinS