This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Lawrence (D) was prosecuted for grand larceny in connection with the theft of an automobile. At the conclusion of evidence in D's trial, he moved for a directed verdict on the grounds that there had been no evidence of the value of the stolen car. Although the prosecution could have moved to reopen and supply the missing evidence, he instead argued that judicial notice of the car's value could be taken. The court denied D's motion and took judicial notice of the fact that the car was worth more than $50, thus justifying the charge of grand larceny. The car was a 1947 Ford Sedan.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.