Legal Opinion · Dissent

Redmon v. Austin

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided September 11, 1989No. 5-87-0506Published

1Dissent

PRESIDING JUSTICE WELCH,

dissenting:

For the reasons which follow, I dissent. I do not agree that Lieutenant Acker’s testimony that he had been told by one or two young men whom he believed to be occupants of the automobile in which plaintiffs were riding that “the driver had lost control of the vehicle coming across the railroad tracks” constituted inadmissible hearsay. Instead, I believe that the out-of-court statement was admissible under the exception to the hearsay rule for admissions of a party-opponent. Lieutenant Acker’s testimony sufficiently established that the statement was made by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hernandez v. Power Construction Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Holmes v. Sahara Coal Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  3. Casey v. BurnsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1955
  4. Friedland v. Allis Chalmers Co. of CanadaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1987
  5. County Collector v. Ford Motor Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API