Commonwealth v. Brady

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided 1986-03-26

Cited by 180 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

NIX, Chief Justice, concurring. I have long been inclined to discard the well-established rule in this Commonwealth that a prior inconsistent statement may not be used as substantive evidence, and have urged the wisdom of the modern rule. Therefore, I am pleased to see that the Court has now altered its position. I am compelled to write separately, however, to express my concern about t…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.