Dorner v. United States

holding that civil judgments are not "usable in subsequent proceedings as evidence of the facts underlying the judgment; for as to those facts, the judgment is hearsay" | holding that civil judgments are not “usable in subsequent proceedings as evidence of the facts underlying the judgment; for as to those facts, the judgment is hearsay” | finding that attorney who prepared opinion letter stating that borrower’s collateral was not subject to prior liens owed Greycas, the creditor who relied on that opinion letter, a duty not to misrepresent negligently the status of borrower’s collateral | finding that attorney who prepared opinion letter stating that borrower's collateral was not subject to prior liens owed Greycas, the creditor who relied on that opinion letter, a duty not to misrepresent negligently the status of borrower's collateral | “a judgment, insofar as it fixes property rights, should be admissible as the official record of such rights, just like other documents of title” | attorney who supplied opinion letter to lender in furtherance of client/borrower's loan application liable for misrepresentations | Rule 20.3(a), AR.Crim.P. (formerly Rule 12.3(a), AR.Crim.P.Temp.), allows the issue of sufficiency of the evidence to be raised by post-verdict motion, even if that issue was not raised at trial