Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

res gestae

Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court

Definitions from Case Law

From 25 U.S. 460 - United States v. Gooding · 1827Most cited · 309 citing opinions

These declarations were connected with acts in furtherance of the objects of the voyage, and within the general scope of his authority as conductor of the enterprise... The testimony went to establish, that he endeavoured to engage Captain Coit to go as mate for the voyage then in progress, and his declarations were all made with reference to that object, and as persuasives to the undertaking. They were, therefore, in the strictest sense, a part of the res gestae

How the Supreme Court has restated “res gestae”

1827183018401850186018701872 most cited: 25 U.S. 460 - United States v. Gooding (1827)
first stateddeparted

Each Supreme Court definition of “res gestae,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.

How often courts cite the cases defining “res gestae”

18201850190019502000203056

Court decisions citing the 4 opinions that defined “res gestae” — 523 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.

All 4 definitions, chronological · 1827–1872

  1. 1858·62 U.S. 146 - Barreda v. Silsbee[p25]· cited 77×

    His representations, declarations, and admissions, respecting the subject-matter, will also bind him, if made at the same time, and constituting a part of the res gestae, and they are of the nature of original evidence, and not hearsay.

  2. 1863·68 U.S. 637 - Beaver v. Taylor[p6]· cited 48×

    The principal fact was the transmission of the receipts. The other facts so illustrate and characterize it, as to constitute the whole one transaction, and render the latter necessary to exhibit the former in its true light and give it its proper effect.

  3. 1872·84 U.S. 19 - Ryan v. Koch[p12]· cited 20×

    Conversations, in such cases, are not adduced so much to prove ulterior facts stated therein as to prove the conversations themselves as facts constituting part of the transaction. Hence they are not hearsay, but original evidence.