McQueeney v. Wilmington Trust Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
779 F.2d 916 (1985)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Francis McQueeney (plaintiff) was a seaman on a supertanker owned by Wilmington Trust Company (defendant). McQueeney sued Wilmington for alleged injuries sustained while on board. McQueeney claimed to have an eyewitness to his injuries, Mauro De la Cerda. McQueeney deposed De la Cerda, and De la Cerda supported McQueeney’s account of the incident. Subsequently, Wilmington’s counsel discovered that De la Cerda did not become a crewmember aboard the supertanker until after McQueeney’s incident occurred. When this was discussed in the trial judge’s chambers, McQueeney’s lawyer stated that he would not use the deposition at trial. Wilmington’s lawyer stated that he wanted to use the deposition to prove that McQueeney had engaged in fraud on the court. The district court ruled that the evidence of the deposition was not relevant and that even if it were, any probative value of any perjury related to the deposition was substantially outweighed by the unfair prejudicial effect to McQueeney. As a result, the district court excluded evidence of the deposition and thus any claim of fraud. The jury returned a verdict for McQueeney. Wilmington appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Becker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 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.
