The Dead Witness, V

P's car collides with D's car, injuring bystander W. At the trial of P's action against D, D testifies. Later, at the trial of W's action against P, W proves D's death and offers a transcript of D's former testimony. P objects. What ruling and why?

Compare this problem with the Dead Witness, II, above. What additional information would you like to have in deciding this problem? In determining the admissibility of former testimony, should the trial judge place greater weight on similarity of factual issues in the two proceedings or on similarity of legal issues? To what extent should former testimony be excluded on the grounds that it related only to a collateral issue in the earlier proceeding?