Legal Opinion

In Re Freiburger

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided July 8, 1986No. Docket 87100PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent Hiram Freiburger appeals by leave granted from the termination of his *255parental rights to his daughter, Heidi. We find no error requiring reversal and affirm.

i

In the instant case Mary Ann Tuschak, a psychiatric social worker, testified about her sessions with Heidi Freiburger. Respondent asserts that much of Tuschak’s testimony was inadmissible hearsay.

Hearsay is defined as "a statement, other than one made by [a] declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” MRE 801(c). A statement may be verbal or nonverbal; a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. WilkinsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Arnold v. EllisMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
  3. Schwartz v. TriffMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
  4. Whitley v. Chrysler CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Galli v. ReutterMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. LaLoneMichigan Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Solomon v. ShuellMichigan Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Marsh v. Department of Civil ServiceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. People v. JamesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. People v. ConnMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988

5 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