Coverage note: this corpus holds the
consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check
palegis.us.
§ 5934. Notes of evidence at former trial.
Whenever any person has been examined as a witness in any civil matter before any
tribunal of this Commonwealth or conducted by virtue of its order or direction, if
such witness afterwards dies, or is out of the jurisdiction so that he cannot be effectively
served with a subpoena, or if he cannot be found, or if he becomes incompetent to
testify for any legally sufficient reason, and if the party, against whom notes of
the testimony of such witness are offered, had actual or constructive notice of the
examination and an opportunity to be present and examine or cross-examine, properly
proven notes of the examination of such witness shall be competent evidence in any
civil issue which may exist at the time of his examination, or which may be afterwards
formed between the same parties and involving the same subject-matter as that upon
which such witness was so examined. For the purpose of contradicting a witness, the
testimony given by him in another or in a former proceeding may be orally proved.
Notes of Decisions
Durkin v. Equine Clinics, Inc., 546 A.2d 665 (Pa. 1988).
· cites it 2× “Any wholesale application of the general rule that a witness may make an admission for the party who has called him and has thereby vouched for his credibility could only eviscerate the principles of law which have given rise to these well-established tenets, and would…”
Turzai v. Un. Comp. Bd. of Rev., 519 A.2d 567 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1986).
· cites it 4× “e us, the claimant contends that the referee erred in admitting the notes of testimony from the Commission hearing, in that the proffered notes of testimony consisted of a copy of the transcript, unverified in any manner other than by the verbal representations of counsel for…”
Ashford v. Ashford, 576 A.2d 1076 (Pa. 1990).
· cites it 2× “As a basis for admission of this testimony, appellant relies upon 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934 Notes of evidence at former trial, which states in pertinent part: Whenever any person has been examined as a witness in any civil matter before any tribunal of this Commonwealth or conducted by…”
George v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., 650 A.2d 1217 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 6× “Williams, deceased, to be read to the jury under section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934, 2 (2) by failing to find the award of $25,000.”
J.K. v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 721 A.2d 1127 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1998).
· cites it 4× “K’s expungement request because it is admissible as an exception to hearsay under Section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §5934. 6 Section 5934 of the Judicial Code requires that the prior testimony sought to be introduced must be from a witness who is “unavailable.”
State Police v. Unemp. Comp. Bd. of Rev., 578 A.2d 1360 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934, provides such *75 transcripts shall be competent evidence whenever witnesses examined at those proceedings are unavailable to testify.”
Flores v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 686 A.2d 66 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996).
“Claimants’ reliance upon Section 5934 of the Judicial Code (Code), 37 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934, is misplaced insofar as administrative proceedings are not governed by technical rules of evidence.”
Wallace v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 548 A.2d 1291 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“5 (d); accord 42 Pa. C. S. §5934. *512 Petitioner further argues that it was error to allow Nathan Lassiter to testify as to what he saw and as to what Mr.”
Commonwealth v. Abraham, 541 A.2d 1161 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“The LCBs offer of this evidence was made pursuant to section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C. S. §5934, 3 which permits the notes of *273 testimony of a witness in a civil matter to be used in any civil matter dealing with the same issue if the witness is out of the…”
Miles v. Sweeney, 623 A.2d 407 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1993).
“Miles asserts that Wilson’s prior testimony is admissible under Section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934, as an exception to the hearsay rule.”
In re Revocation of Restaurant Liquor License R-7792, 453 A.2d 687 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1982).
· cites it 4× “The appellant licensee contests the trial judge’s ruling that the notes of the minor’s testimony were admissible at the court hearing, citing Section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C. S. §5934, which provides pertinently : Whenever any person has been examined as a witness in…”
Commonwealth v. Commonwealth, 578 A.2d 1360 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Section 5934 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5934, provides such *75 transcripts shall be competent evidence whenever witnesses examined at those proceedings are unavailable to testify.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.