Hill v. Hartog

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “Evidence which is [inadmissible] for one purpose cannot be excluded if it is admissible [for] another purpose.”
• \Evidence which is [inadmissible] for one purpose cannot be excluded if it is admissible [for] another purpose.\
• “Evidence which is [inadmissible] for one purpose cannot be excluded if it is admissible [for] another purpose.”
• evidence which is improper for one purpose cannot be excluded if it is admissible for another purpose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).