About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 Wash. L. Rev. & St. B. J. 181 (1937)
Admissions

handle is hein.journals/washlr12 and id is 189 raw text is: WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW and STATE BAR JOURNAL VOLUME XII. JULY, 1937 NUMBER 3 ADMISSIONS EDMUN'D M. MORGAN* Personal and Adoptive In Greenleaf's first edition, he adopted the dictum of Mascardus that an admission is not evidence but a substitute for proof., This was repeated in the first fourteen editions following, was copied by Taylor, was accepted by Wharton, apparently acqui- esced in by Thayer, and later strenuously insisted upon by Pro- fessor Gifford at Columbia. Unless the dictum be given the inter- pretation put upon it by Gifford, that it takes the place of proof so long as the jury does not disbelieve it, it would seem to mean that an extra-judicial admission stands on the same basis as an admission made in the pleadings or by stipulation in open court: if it once be established that the admission was made, then the matter admitted is beyond the realm of dispute in the case. And there are a few English cases appearing to hold just that. When Mr. Wigmore came to edit the sixteenth edition of Greenleaf, he saw at once that these English cases were no longer law anywhere; but he accepted Greenleaf's conclusion that an admission is not evidence, by taking from it all its supposed power to establish the matter stated in it and giving it only an impeaching effect.2 It is, he said, like any unsworn contradictory statement of a witness, which may be admitted to destroy his story on the stand but can not be used to establish the opposite. He, therefore, defined it as a statement inconsistent with the position which the admitter is taking at the trial. It is receivable even if the admitter has not testified, for it is contrary to the statements made or reasonably implied in his pleadings; and no foundation by way of calling his attention to the prior contradictory statem:ent is necessary. In the first edition of Wigmore's own work, he took the same position; but in the second, he bows to the practically unanimous holding of the courts that an admission is receivable for the truth of the *Acting Dean and Professor of Law, Harvard Law School. 1GnEENLEAF, EVIDENCE (1st ed. 1842) § 169. 2Id. (16th ed. 1899) § 169. For Professor Gifford's criticism of Dean Wigmore's view, see (1924) 24 Columbia L. Rav. 442444.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most