In Commonwealth v Vose (157 Mass. 393, 32 N.E. 355), the agency theory was applied and the testimony of a third party as to a conversation between himself and a deceased person through an interpreter was admitted into evidence.
Summary of this case from People v. PerezNO. 644 MAL 2015
02-17-2016
Commonwealth v. William Vose
Opinion
Appeal from the Superior Court.
Disposition: Denied.
In Commonwealth v Vose (157 Mass. 393, 32 N.E. 355), the agency theory was applied and the testimony of a third party as to a conversation between himself and a deceased person through an interpreter was admitted into evidence.
Summary of this case from People v. PerezFull title:COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. WILLIAM VOSE, Petitioner
Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Date published: Feb 17, 2016
" Miller v. Lathrop, 50 Minn. 91, 93, 52 N.W. 274. To the same effect are Commonwealth v. Vose, 157 Mass.…
Terrapin v. BarkerBoth plaintiff and defendant used the interpretor as their agent to translate and communicate to him that…