Case BriefEvidence unit 6: best evidence rule1/28/15Identity of CaseSirico v. Cott, 1971Page 54 of the casebookSummary of Facts/Procedural HistoryPlaintiff suffered personal injury. In support of his case, he brought a doctor who took xray photographs of his spine but for reasons unexplained no longer had those photographs. Defendant objects under bestevidence rule, sustained, appeal, confirmed. Statement of the IssueWhere the proponent cannot explain/justify the use of secon-best evidence, are they allowed to admit the second best evidence? HoldingIn this case, no.Reasoning“this often mentioned and much misunderstood rule merely requires a party who seeks to prove the contents of a document to offer in evidence the original copy of that document. If he does not, but rather offers secondary evidence…the adversary’s objection must be sustained. But if the proponent explains his failure to offer the original copy of the document, he may then proceed to proves its contents by whatever secondary evidence is available to him.”Basically you don’t need the originals but you need a good reason for not having them. Evaluation Herzig v. Swift says the same thing (page 55 of the casebook): “In its modern application, the best evidence rule amounts to little more than the requirement that the contents of a writing must be provedby the introduction of the writing itself, unless its absence can be satisfactorily accounted
View Full Document
Unlocking...