Legal Opinion · Dissent

Territory v. Curran

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided August 4, 1916No. 939Published

Exceptions from Circuit Court, First Circuit. Hon. C. W. Ashford, Judge.

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION OF

QUARLES, J.

I am unable to concur in the conclusion reached by the majority, but do concur in the conclusion of the majority that section 3821 R. L., relating to the admissibility of depositions, does not apply to the case at bar.

In my opinion the evidence of the witness Derda was not admissible. All of the authorities agree that the evidence *430given by a witness at a former trial is only admissible as secondary evidence in cases of necessity. The evidence of said witness was material, and to show its materiality I shall briefly refer to the principal points in the evidence…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. People v. DrosteMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Hicks v. LovellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  3. State v. KingUtah Supreme Court · 1902
  4. State v. NelsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  5. State v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911

32 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