Doe v. Roe

The apparent purpose of the defendant is to show by declarations of Bernard Parren that he, and not the plaintiffs, was the heir at law of Mrs. Siber at the time of her death. That declarations of a deceased member of a family, with respect to questions of pedigree, when made before the particular controversy arose, and, therefore, when there was no motive to misrepresent, are ordinarily admissible as exceptions to the hearsay rule, is not denied. Jones on Evidence (Blue Book), § 312; Chamberlayne’s Handbook on Evidence, §§ 927, 928.

It is well settled, however, that before such declarations…