Hodas v. Davis
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
203 A.D. 297, 196 N.Y.S. 801 (1922)
- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
I. David Hodas (plaintiff) was injured after a train collided with his car. William Meddaugh observed the accident and made a written statement containing his observations of the accident. After making the statement, Meddaugh sustained an injury that severely impaired his memory of the accident. Hodas brought suit against James Davis (defendant), the director general of Railroads. At the trial, Davis called Meddaugh as a witness. Because Meddaugh did not remember much about the accident, Davis introduced Meddaugh’s written statement. Meddaugh’s out-of-court statement was offered to prove the truth of what Meddaugh wrote. Meddaugh declined to testify that the statement was accurate at the time it was written. The trial-court judge admitted the statement. The facts in Meddaugh’s statement were corroborated by other witnesses. Subsequently, the jury found in favor of Davis. Hodas appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kellogg, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
