Court Opinion

ID: 9761364
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 01:40:59.642799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:23.177644
License: Public Domain

Haneman, J.
(concurring). I concur in the opinion of Justice Francis.
However, on the hearing in the Law Division, I would not place on the plaintiffs the burden of subpoenaing for cross-examination, those witnesses who were produced by defendants at the legislative hearing. I would oblige plaintiffs to make an application upon notice to defendants and under oath, setting forth the names of such witnesses desired for cross-examination, and a statement of the reasons for such cross-examination. After hearing, if the court finds that *538plaintiffs have a reasonable ground for the attendance of such witnesses, an order should be entered directing defendants to procure the attendance of the named persons at a designated time and place for cross-examination. By this proceeding, the troublesome questions of locating witnesses, obtaining the presence of defendants’ experts and payment of witness fees are resolved and placed on defendants who should rightfully bear these burdens.
For remandment — Chief Justice Weintkaub and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor, Hall, Schettino and HaneMAN-7.
Opposed — None.