Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Conrad Vs. Griffey

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 01, 1850

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

29 entries 2 linked 27 unlinked
Show
  1. Ellicott Vs. Pearl US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1836
  2. Mcniel Vs. Holbrook US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1838
  3. U.S. 480 (1850) U.S. Supreme Court Conrad v. Griffey
    Search
  4. U.S. 11 How. 480 480 (1850) Conrad v. Griffey
    Search
  5. Thus, in some places, as in New York, such evidence is as a general rule now treated as inadmissible. Robertson v. Caw
    Search
  6. Robb v. Hackley
    Search
  7. Dudley v. Bolles
    Search
  8. Wend. 465. So in Vermont. Gibbs v. Linsley
    Search
  9. Vt. 208. Though at one time in New York it was allowed, and particularly in certain criminal cases. People v. Vane
    Search
  10. Jackson v. Etz
    Search
  11. has been deemed competent. As in Massachusetts, in a criminal case, where an accomplice was a witness. Commonwealth v. Bosworth
    Search
  12. Page 52 U. S. 491 22 Pick. 397. And in Maryland, if the statements were prior in point of time. Cook v. Curtis
    Search
  13. In Pennsylvania also such statements have been admitted without reference to their priority. As in Parker v. Gonsalus
    Search
  14. Henderson v. Jones
    Search
  15. id. 322. So in Indiana. Coffin v. Anderson
    Search
  16. Lutterrell v. Reynell
    Search
  17. is not admissible if the statements were made subsequent to the contradictions proved on the other side. Ellicott v. Pearl
    Search
  18. perhaps the decision should not rest on any local rule, though a different principle seems involved in McNiel v. Holbrook
    Search
  19. Pet. 85, where the rule of evidence was changed by a state statute. Clark v. Sohier
    Search
  20. King v. Eriswell
    Search
  21. U.S. Supreme Court Conrad v. Griffey
    Search
  22. Robertson v. Caw
    Search
  23. Vermont. Gibbs v. Linsley
    Search
  24. People v. Vane
    Search
  25. Commonwealth v. Bosworth
    Search
  26. Cook v. Curtis
    Search
  27. Parker v. Gonsalus
    Search
  28. Indiana. Coffin v. Anderson
    Search
  29. Clark v. Sohier
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales