Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wilson v. Davis

Montana Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 1940No. 7,920Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Erickson:

I dissent. The majority has found that the statements of Mrs. Baxter are not declarations against interest and so they do not come within the exceptions to the hearsay rule contained in section 10531, Revised Codes. I believe they do come within subdivision 4 of that section, which provides that evidence may be given upon a trial of the following facts: “The act or declaration of a deceased person done or made against his interest in respect to his real property.”

The majority says that the statement of Mrs. Baxter is not admissible since she had parted with title to the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Gulf Red Cedar Co. v. CrenshawSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  2. Staff v. Montana Petroleum Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Laundreville v. MeroMontana Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Lyon v. . RickerNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
  5. Osnes Livestock Co. v. WarrenMontana Supreme Court · 1936

7 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