Court Opinion

ID: 9451106
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 17:06:46.082171+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:32:34.529255
License: Public Domain

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the well-reasoned opinion which has been prepared by Judge Edwards reversing and remanding this case for a new trial. On the question of the possible application of the Michigan Dead Man’s Statute, I concur in the view that, under the rule now in effect in this Circuit, Rule 43(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not foreclose the application of the Michigan statute in a diversity case tried in Michigan under facts calling for such application. We have chosen to follow Appolonio v. Baxter, 217 F.2d 267 (C.A.6) in the present case under the doctrine of stare decisis. This appears to be the present majority rule, although there is persuasive authority to the contrary. (See cases cited in second footnote to the opinion of Judge Edwards.) Quite obviously the holding in the present case will not preclude this court under appropriate facts at a future date from reconsidering this rule in the light of subsequent developments in the law on this subject.
Whether or not the facts of this case will call for application of the Dead Man’s Statute is a matter to be determined by the district court from the evidence developed at the new trial.