Opinion ID: 2105209
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Trial Court Erred In Allowing a Witness Over Objection to Testify as to a Hearsay Conversation With the Decedent.

Text: The particular testimony objected to was given by the Air Force doctor who dispatched the ambulance to Philadelphia. Specifically, he testified that he told the decedent to get the patient to Philadelphia as quickly as possible, and to turn into Wilmington if he should deteriorate suddenly. The objection is that the testimony was hearsay and was a violation of the so-called Dead Man's Statute, 10 Del.C. § 4302. It is obvious, we think, that the testimony in question was not hearsay. The doctor did not testify as to anything told him by anyone. He testified as to the instructions he gave the ambulance crew and to nothing more. Nor, we think, was the testimony a violation of 10 Del.C., § 4302. This statute prohibits in actions by or against personal representatives any party testifying against the other as to any transaction with or statement by the decedent. The short answer to the argument is that the doctor was not a party to the action. The statute does not prohibit such testimony from a witness not a party. The Highway Department cited Kaufmann v. McKeown, Del., 193 A.2d 81, as authority for its position, but we think the case is of no help to it. In Kaufmann, a suit against a decedent's administratrix, the plaintiff suing the decedent's estate for personal injury received while a passenger in the decedent's car, was prohibited from testifying as to the facts of the accident. However, the other passengers in the car were permitted to testify. The case is obviously not in point. Furthermore, it is at least doubtful that 10 Del.C., § 4302 has application in the case at bar in any event since the plaintiff is suing under the Wrongful Death Statute, 10 Del.C., § 3704(b), as the widow of the decedent and not as his administratrix. There was no error in the admission of the testimony of the Air Force doctor.