TRAVELERS FIRE Ins. Co. v. WRIGHT - 1958 OK 50, 322 P.2d 417

Rule:

Testimony from a criminal case can be introduced in a subsequent civil case where it appears that it is impossible to obtain the testimony of the witness who testified in the criminal case; that there was an opportunity to cross-examine the witness by the party against whom the testimony is sought to be used in the civil case, or by one whose motive and interest in cross-examining was the same; and that there is an identity of issues. Identity of all parties is not an independent requirement in all cases.

Facts:

Appellees, J. B. Wright and J. C. Wright, had brought an action to recover a certain sum on two fire insurance policies. Appellants, The Travelers Fire Insurance Company and The Western Fire Insurance Company, defended on the ground that appellees had deliberately caused the fire, which destroyed their property. A jury returned a verdict in favor of appellees and appellants sought review. On appeal, appellants contended that the trial court erred in rejecting their offer of former testimony. The testimony was to the effect that one of the appellees actively procured the burning of the property. This testimony was given at a prior criminal trial for arson.

Issue:

Did the trial court err in rejecting appellants’ offer of former testimony given at a prior criminal trial?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court reversed the judgment awarding appellees a recovery because the trial court erred in rejecting appellants' offer of former testimony given at a prior criminal trial. The court held that testimony from a criminal case may be introduced in a subsequent trial where it appears that it is impossible to obtain the testimony of the witness who testified in the criminal case. The former testimony was admissible since there was an opportunity for the opposing party to cross-examine the witness.