Ogata v. J. G. Construction Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that victim’s hearsay statements indicating that she intended to end the marriage reflected her state of mind and were admissible under Rule 803(3)
• holding that victim's hearsay statements indicating that she intended to end the marriage reflected her state of mind and were admissible under Rule 803(3)
• distinguishing substance from form of discovery and reasoning that for purposes of our discovery statutes, a defendant must simply be provided with the substance or essence of a witness’s oral statement
• there is no absolute affirmative duty to investigate juror misconduct absent a report of prejudicial conduct
• twenty-two years not too remote

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).