Cooper v. Baker

Superior Court of Delaware

Cooper v. Baker

139 A. 254, 33 Del. 489, 3 W.W. Harr. 489, 1927 Del. LEXIS 34

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided April 11, 1927·No. Summons Case, No. 27·Published

Opinion

Rice, J.

As the alleged statement of the deceased was not an admission against interest, did not accompany any act done by him, and was not a statement of intention, it does not come within any exception to the hearsay rule; we, therefore, grant the motion to strike out. State v. Long, 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 380, 123 A. 350; Wigmore on Evidence, vol. 3, § 1712; Greenleaf on Ev., § 108, vol. 1.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rice, J.

As the alleged statement of the deceased was not an admission against interest, did not accompany any act done by him, and was not a statement of intention, it does not come within any exception to the hearsay rule; we, therefore, grant the motion to strike out. State v. Long, 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 380, 123 A. 350; Wigmore on Evidence, vol. 3, § 1712; Greenleaf on Ev., § 108, vol. 1.

Cooper v. Baker, 139 A. 254, 33 Del. 489, 3 W.W. Harr. 489, 1927 Del. LEXIS 34 (Del. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

139 A. 254 (Cooper v. Baker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related