SCHULTE v. SCHULTE

Nos. 93-1588 and 93-1745.

71 Ohio St.3d 41 (1994)

SCHULTE, APPELLANT, v. SCHULTE, APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided November 30, 1994.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joyce E. Barrett, for appellant.

James E. Hitchcock, for appellee.


WRIGHT, J.

The first issue the court must address is whether the trial court used the correct standard to determine that Elizabeth was not competent to testify under Evid. R. 601(A). Evid. R. 601 provides: "Every person is competent to be a witness except: (A) Those of unsound mind, and children under ten years of age, who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly."

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases