Court Opinion

ID: 9776233
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:28:15.74819+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:36.136526
License: Public Domain

HIGGINS, Judge,
concurring.
I concur with the majority in affirmance of the judgment for plaintiff against defendants. I do so specially, however, to express my opinion that it is neither neces*288sary nor appropriate to tailor an exception to the hearsay rule and overrule Holmes v. Terminal R.R. Association of St. Louis, 363 Mo. 1178, 257 S.W.2d 922 (1953), in order to deal with the error charged to admission of the hospital record in this case.
Admission of the record excerpt, if erroneous, was not prejudicial because everything recited in the excerpt had already been established by plaintiff’s testimony prior to admission of the record. Hunter v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company, 315 S.W.2d 689 (Mo.1958); Harris v. Goggins, 374 S.W.2d 6 (Mo. banc 1963); State v. Zagorski, 632 S.W.2d 475 (Mo. banc 1982).