Hill v. Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc.
West Virginia Supreme Court
1DissentCaplan, Justice
While I am in agreement with the majority that the paint stick mark is hearsay, I am unable to agree that the pipe with the paint stick mark is a business record and thereby comes within the exception to the hearsay rule. I believe that the pipe was improperly admitted into evidence and that without it, there was insufficient evidence to link the appellant, U. S. Steel, as the supplier of the tube.
The business record exception to the hearsay rule does not apply in this case. See generally, Martufi v. Daniels, 99 W.Va. 673, 129 S.E. 709 (1925); State v. LaRue, 98 W.Va. 677, 128 S.E. 116…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. LarueWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1925
- Griffith v. American Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1915
- Vintroux v. SimmsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1898
- Deitz v. McVeyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
- Martufi v. DanielsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1925