View by Topic
Evidentiary Issues > Hearsay > Business Records
New York v. Microsoft Corp., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7683 (D.D.C. Apr. 12, 2002).
Emails were not business records within meaning of hearsay rule.
Emails were not business records within meaning of hearsay rule.
SKW Real Estate Ltd. Pshp. v. Gallicchio, 49 Conn. App. 563, 716 A.2d 903, 1998 Conn. App. LEXIS 324 (July 28, 1998).
Admission under business records exception does not require firsthand knowledge of information input.
Admission under business records exception does not require firsthand knowledge of information input.
Monotype Corp. PLC v. International Typeface Corp., 43 F. 3d 443 (9th Cir. 1994).
In a dispute between two typeface design competitors, in-house customer email reflecting disparaging email from one of the competitors was excluded from evidence. The customer's email was prejudicial and not a business record admissible under the Fed. R. Evid. 803(b) business record exception.
In a dispute between two typeface design competitors, in-house customer email reflecting disparaging email from one of the competitors was excluded from evidence. The customer's email was prejudicial and not a business record admissible under the Fed. R. Evid. 803(b) business record exception.
United States v. Catabran, 836 F.2d 453 (9th Cir. 1988).
General ledger computer printouts were admissible as a business record under F. R. Evid. 803(6) in a trial for concealing assets. The court held that "[a]ny question as to the accuracy of the printouts, whether resulting from incorrect data entry or the operation of the computer program, as with inaccuracies in any other type of business records, would have affected only the weight of the printouts, not their admissibility."
General ledger computer printouts were admissible as a business record under F. R. Evid. 803(6) in a trial for concealing assets. The court held that "[a]ny question as to the accuracy of the printouts, whether resulting from incorrect data entry or the operation of the computer program, as with inaccuracies in any other type of business records, would have affected only the weight of the printouts, not their admissibility."
United States v. Croft, 750 F.2d 1354, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 15910, 16 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (CBC) 1141 (7th Cir. Wis. Dec. 14, 1984).
Computer data compilations may constitute business records and may be admitted at trial if a proper foundation is established.
Computer data compilations may constitute business records and may be admitted at trial if a proper foundation is established.
United States v. Young Bros., Inc., 728 F.2d 682, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24395, 1984-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P65925, 15 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (CBC) 484 (5th Cir. Tex. Mar. 19, 1984).
Rejects argument that computer-generated records are inherently less reliable, and therefore require a greater foundation, than paper records.
Rejects argument that computer-generated records are inherently less reliable, and therefore require a greater foundation, than paper records.
United States v. Vela, 673 F.2d 86, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 20468, 10 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (CBC) 333 (5th Cir. Tex. Apr. 2, 1982).
Computer data compilations are to be treated as any other records of regularly conducted activity; computer-generated telephone records admitted as business records.
Computer data compilations are to be treated as any other records of regularly conducted activity; computer-generated telephone records admitted as business records.
