City of Webster Groves v. Quick

Citation. Webster Groves v. Quick, 319 S.W.2d 543

Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

CitationWebster Groves v. Quick, 319 S.W.2d 543, 1959 Mo. LEXIS 932 (Mo. 1959)

Brief Fact Summary. This is an excerpt from a hearsay argument in which the defendant, Quick (the “defendant”) argued that the court erred in allowing a Police officer to read the electric timer which was used to show he was speeding.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. It is not hearsay when a the person who keeps records in the ordinary course of business, or the person who regularly uses a machine reads the contents of such machine or records.

Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

In cases involving the appellate jurisdiction of this court, we have sedulously retained to ourselves the right to look within the shell of briefs, pleadings, and transcript to the kernel of the thing, to see if the jurisdictional question is of substance; for to give life to a jurisdictional question it must be real, not colorable only.

View Full Point of Law

Facts. A complaint was filed against the defendant for speeding, in violation of the City of Webster Groves’ speed ordinance. The defendant appealed the court’s decision that he was speeding, arguing that it was hearsay to allow the Police Officer who filed the complaint to read the electric timer which showed that he was traveling at a speed of forty miles per hour.

Issue. Whether a reading of a machine is hearsay because it is given by a person who receives the information and uses it to assert the truth of the matter in court?

Held. Hearsay cannot be applied to what a witness, through his own senses or by scientific instrumentation observed.

Create New Group