Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

These two cases illustrate that its not reliability

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: been admitted as a limited instruction, only evidence against Stacy Lemon on behalf of Brittney....not admissible against the mother plaintiff (but this limiting instruction practically doesn't help anyone, because both were involved in the same accident.) Would be impossible to find that the railroad was not liable in Lemon's case but was liable in Sheila's case. Arguments by appellant: Statements were circumstantially unreliable, she contradicted herself a number of times as a result of this event. She said things about this event that were undeniably wrong.....and she's brain injured...they are saying that these statements are not circumstantially reliable. Response by Court: If it's party admission, we don't care about reliability or unreliability...that's not the theory..the theory of admissibility of admissions is you said it we don't care if it is unreliable in the circumstances! (that's the problem when we get to 803 and 804 based on reliability, there we want to talk about reliability!!) b...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online