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

The Wrights (P) brought this action to recover under two fire insurance policies. Travelers (D) defended on the ground that the fires had been deliberately set with intent to defraud D. At trial, D called Eppler and Brown to testify as witnesses, but both invoked their constitutional privilege against self-incrimination and refused. D then attempted to introduce certified transcripts from an earlier criminal trial where P was charged with arson. The transcripts contained testimony by both witnesses that P, with their assistance, deliberately burned the property. The trial court refused to admit the transcripts. D appeals the judgment in P's favor.

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.