Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Pennsylvania opinions name it 7 courts 1941–1980 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Garrett Estategreen2 sentences1980In Garrett Estate, 371 Pa. 284, 287 , 89 A. 2d 531 (1952) (cited in McClain Estate, supra), the court stated as follows: “Pedigree may be proved by certain limited types of hearsay evidence, including inter alia church records, birth certificates, baptismal cer tificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, family Bibles, ancient documents, tombstones or monuments. ...” In McClain, supra, at fn. 6 , the court states: “The remaining issues raised by appellants also involved evidentiary rulings by the trial court which ruled certain evidence inadmissible to show pedigree because a proper 1980In Garrett Estate, 371 Pa. 284, 287 , 89 A. 2d 531 (1952) (cited in McClain Estate, supra), the court stated as follows: “Pedigree may be proved by certain limited types of hearsay evidence, including inter alia church records, birth certificates, baptismal cer tificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, family Bibles, ancient documents, tombstones or monuments. ...” In McClain, supra, at fn. 6 , the court states: “The remaining issues raised by appellants also involved evidentiary rulings by the trial court which ruled certain evidence inadmissible to show pedigree because a proper | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sitler v. Gehr
green
2 sentences1963In order for such testimony to be competent within the pedigree exception, however, the following requirements, as set forth in Sitler v. Gehr, 105 Pa. 577 (1884), at page 592, must be met: “The rules of evidence applicable to pedigree cases are: 1. 1958These requirements were reviewed in Link’s Estate (No. 1), 319 Pa. 513, 520 , as follows: “In Sitler v. Gehr, 105 Pa. 577, 596 , it was stated, T entirely agree that in order to admit hearsay evidence in pedigree, you must, by evidence dehors the declaration, connect the person making them with the family.’ Sitler v. Gehr, supra, holds that declarations are admissible if, first, the declarations are made ante litem motam; second, the declarant is dead; and, third, the quotation just noted, to which the court below adds ‘there must be some evidence independent of the statement itself that the p | 2 | 1958–1963 |
Commonwealth v. Bennett
green
2 sentences1979Appellant finds this case like Commonwealth v. Bennett, 224 Pa. Super. 238 , 303 A.2d 220 (1973). 1979Appellant finds this case like Commonwealth v. Bennett, 224 Pa. Super. 238 , 303 A.2d 220 (1973). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
American Life Insurance & Trust Co. v. Rosenagle
green
1 sentence1975Id. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Link's Estate (No. 1)
green
1 sentence1958These requirements were reviewed in Link’s Estate (No. 1), 319 Pa. 513, 520 , as follows: “In Sitler v. Gehr, 105 Pa. 577, 596 , it was stated, T entirely agree that in order to admit hearsay evidence in pedigree, you must, by evidence dehors the declaration, connect the person making them with the family.’ Sitler v. Gehr, supra, holds that declarations are admissible if, first, the declarations are made ante litem motam; second, the declarant is dead; and, third, the quotation just noted, to which the court below adds ‘there must be some evidence independent of the statement itself that the p | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Paxos v. Jarka Corporation
green
2 sentences1941In Paxos v. Jarka Corp., 314 Pa. 148 , 171 A. 468 , we pointed out the limits on the admission of such records and indicated the probative elements that must be present. 1941In Paxos v. Jarka Corp., 314 Pa. 148 , 171 A. 468 , we pointed out the limits on the admission of such records and indicated the probative elements that must be present. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.