Legal Opinion · Dissent

Maxwell v. City of Springfield

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided January 2, 1986No. 13648Published

1DissentMaus, Judge

I must respectfully dissent. The judgment is reversed because the trial court instructed the jury to disregard the deposition testimony of Worcester in determining the liability of defendant Debow. So far as defendant Debow was concerned, that deposition testimony was hearsay evidence. I believe the admonition of the trial court was required and was not error.

*96It is significant this deposition was offered by the plaintiff against the defendant Debow who was not a party when the deposition was taken and had no notice of and did not participate in the taking of that deposition. There is a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lloyd v. American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
  2. Bartlett v. Kansas City Public Service Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1942
  3. Paducah Towing Company, Inc. v. Paducah Towing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
  4. Hendricks v. CallowaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
  5. Insul-Wool Insulation Corp. v. Home Insulation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API