Robert H. Jackson

Name: Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence
Author: Robert H. Jackson

Summary

“Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence”, is a work by Robert H. Jackson. It explores elements such as witness, discovery and lawyer.

Quotes from Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence (Robert H. Jackson)

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ Every one who has tried it knows that it is almost impossible so fairly to record the expressions and emphasis of a witness that when he testifies in the environment of the court and under the influence of the leading question there will not be departures in some respects. Whenever the testimony of the witness would differ from the 'exact' statement the lawyer had delivered, the lawyer's statement would be whipped out to impeach the witness. Counsel producing his adversary's 'inexact' statement could lose nothing by saying, 'Here is a contradiction, gentlemen of the jury. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ To consider first the most extreme aspect of the requirement in litigation here, we find it calls upon counsel, if he has had any conversations with any of the crews of the vessels in question or of any other, to 'set forth in detail the exact provision of any such oral statements or reports.' Thus the demand is not for the production of a transcript in existence but calls for the creation of a written statement not in being. But the statement by counsel of what a witness told him is not evidence when written plaintiff could not introduce it to prove his case. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ But it too often is overlooked that the lawyer and the law office are indispensable parts of our administration of justice. Law-abiding people can go nowhere else to learn the ever changing and constantly multiplying rules by which they must behave and to obtain redress for their wrongs. The welfare and tone of the legal profession is therefore of prime consequence to society, which would feel the consequences of such a practice as petitioner urges secondarily but certainly.
'Discovery' is one of the working tools of the legal profession. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ It seems equally clear that discovery should not nullify the privilege of confidential communication between attorney and client. But those principles give us no real assistance here because what is being sought is neither evidence nor is it a privileged communication between attorney and client. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ Having been supplied the names of the witnesses, petitioner's lawyer gives no reason why he cannot interview them himself. If an employee-witness refuses to tell his story, he, too, may be examined under the Rules. He may be compelled on discovery as fully as on the trial to disclose his version of the facts. But that is his own disclosure-it can be used to impeach him if he contradicts it and such a deposition is not useful to promote an unseemly disagreement between the witness and the counsel in the case. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ I do not know whether it is my adversary or his witness who is not telling the truth, but one is not.' Of course, if this practice were adopted, that scene would be repeated over and over again. The lawyer who delivers such statements often would find himself branded a deceiver afraid to take the stand to support his own version of the witness's conversation with him, or else he will have to go on the stand to defend his own credibility-perhaps against that of his chief witness, or possibly even his client.
Every lawyer dislikes to take the witness stand and will do so only for grave reasons. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ He bases his claim to it in his brief on the view that the Rules were to do away with the old situation where a law suit developed into 'a battle of wits between counsel.' But a common law trial is and always should be an adversary proceeding. Discovery was hardly intended to enable a learned profession to perform its functions either without wits or on wits borrowed from the adversary. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson, Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence

“ Production of such statements are governed by Rule 34 and on 'Showing good cause therefor' the court may order their inspection, copying or photographing. No such application has here been made; the demand is made on the basis of right, not on showing of cause. ”

Robert H. Jackson

Summary

Quotes from Hickman v. Taylor — Concurrence (Robert H. Jackson)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature