dead man's statute


Also found in: Wikipedia.

dead man's statute

A law of evidence employed in many states. One version says that a witness may not testify about oral statements made by a decedent (someone who has died) if the effect of the testimony would be to make the decedent's estate larger or smaller, even if the witness would not benefit one way or the other. Another version says witnesses cannot testify about statements made by a decedent if the witness would benefit from those alleged statements.(Be sure to clearly understand which is being used in a specific case.)

Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
The justices said Virginia's Dead Man's Statute allowed that testimony, despite predictions that unreliable hearsay might be used to unfairly boost a decedent's case.
The Virginia Dead Man's Statute has two parts, and neither should come into play, Edwards told the justices at oral argument Oct.
Eure of Roanoke, representing Thompson's executrix, cited two Virginia cases where the court interpreted the second sentence of the Dead Man's Statute. In both cases, the court refused to impose restrictions on the second sentence or on the admissibility of a decedent's declaration, Eure told the justices.
A specific archaic 19th-century New York state law, also referred to as the "dead man's statute" may pose a serious complication to the (http://www.ibtimes.com/fox-news-sexual-harassment-allegations-timeline-roger-ailes-bill-oreilly-sean-hannity-2529746) sexual harassment cases filed against Ailes.
Of the nine remaining jurisdictions with relaxed rules for nuncupative wills, four continue to restrict evidence of a contract via some form of dead man's statute. (301) Among the thirty-two states that have repealed the dead man's statute, only five allow nuncupative wills.
Inheritance scholars have deplored nuncupative wills as "obsolescent and outmoded" (307) at the same time as evidence scholars have condemned the dead man's statute as a "relic." (308) Because the alternative forms of transfer are categorically distinct, the contradiction has gone largely unnoticed.
1979) (offering a similar observation, and relating criticism of the dead man's statute to criticism of the general bar on interested testimony, which was overturned in the nineteenth century).
The court observed that the plaintiffs raised two issues for review in their appeal: (1) Whether the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants by holding that the professional medical negligence claim was barred by the one-year state of limitations which allegedly began to run; (2) Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the defendants' denying plaintiffs' claims by admitting evidence in contravention of the Tennessee Dead Man's Statute. The plaintiffs' sole objection to the use of the depositions taken by the defendants and the use of the family diary as evidence, was that it was barred by the state's Dead Man's Statute.
The bill repeals [section] 90.602, F.S., the "Dead Man's Statute," which prohibits an interested person from testifying as to an oral communication with a now deceased or incompetent person.
5th DCA 1989), a summary judgment motion in a dead man's statute environment presents a particularly delicate issue, largely because of the specter of a waiver of its protection.
5th DCA 2001), say "no" and have correctly held that "[w]here the inescapable inference from an interested party would show that the decedent agreed to a material term or condition which is missing from a written contract, the testimony would violate the Deadman's Statute." (additional citations omitted) Similarly, whether written, oral, or partially both, where writings and independent witnesses' testimony may establish some, but not all, of the material terms of a contract with the decedent, the dead man's statute applies to bar same.