PRACTICAL RESULTS OF FEDERAL EQUITY RULE 75 (B) AS TO RESTATEMENT OF TESTIMONY IN NARRATIVE FORM

Authors

Marion L. Severn, Member of the New York bar

Abstract

During the twenty-four years since the adoption of the narrative form for records on appeal in the federal courts under Equity Rule 75 (b), there have been some printed comments and criticisms of the rule as well as informal and unrecorded discussion by the bench and bar. The more recent comments on the working out of the rule vary little from the prophecies made soon after its adoption. There is not much of value that can be added to the theoretical discussions of the rule either by its proponents or its opponents. But there remain certain highly important practical questions: How has the rule actually worked? If there are advantages to be derived from this practice, have they outweighed the accompanying disadvantages? The answers to these questions should be found in the experiences of thousands of lawyers who have prepared records on appeal under Equity Rule 75 (b) and under similar rules in the state courts; in the reactions of the judges who have examined these records; and in the pages of the records themselves.

Recommended Citation

Marion L. Severn, PRACTICAL RESULTS OF FEDERAL EQUITY RULE 75 (B) AS TO RESTATEMENT OF TESTIMONY IN NARRATIVE FORM, 34 Mich. L. Rev. 1093 (1936).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol34/iss8/4