- US v. Annunziato (2d Cir 1961)
- A is charged with taking bribes; he tells Harry the contractor that if he wants the job done, he has to give him some money; H died before trial; H’s son testified that his dad had said that A called and requested some money.
- issue: can H’s son’s statement be used to prove that A made that call? it’s backward-looking (used to prove something that happened in the past).
- holding: statement admitted.
- it’s in the immediate past.
- future action closely related to the retrospective component – H was doing something right then based on the immediate past event; the future is so closely related by design to the past that we’re going to let it all in, won’t draw a line b/t the two.
The best place for complete law school case briefs and law-related news. Want to advertise or post sponsored content? contact us at mrmetropolitan@gmail.com
Thursday, September 6, 2012
US v. Annunziato case brief
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...

-
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
-
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
-
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...
No comments:
Post a Comment