Authentication of Writings and Real Evidence CA

Question 1

Authentication of Ancient Documents

Answer 1

A document can be authenticated by evidence that it is sufficiently old, is in a condition that creates no suspicion as to authenticity, and was found in a place where such a writing would be kept.

Federal Rules: A document qualifies as “ancient” if it is at least 20 years old.

CA: The document must be more than 30 years old.

Question 2

Authentication of Ancient Documents

Answer 2

A document can be authenticated by evidence that it is sufficiently old, is in a condition that creates no suspicion as to authenticity, and was found in a place where such a writing would be kept.

Federal Rules: A document qualifies as “ancient” if it is at least 20 years old.
Note: the hearsay exception for ancient documents applies to documents prepared before 1998.

CA: The document must be more than 30 years old. The hearsay exception follows authentication rule- applies to documents that are more than 30 years old.

Question 3

Self-Authenticating Writings

Answer 3

Authentication is unnecessary for certain writings.

Federal and California law recognize a similar list of self-authenticating documents. However, in California, trade inscriptions and certified business records are not self-authenticating.

Question 4

Best Evidence/Secondary Evidence Rule

Answer 4

Federal: “Best Evidence”, CA: “Secondary Evidence”

When a party seeks to prove the contents of a writing, the best evidence rule requires the party to produce the original.

A duplicate (i.e., an exact copy made by mechanical means, like a photocopy or carbon copy) is usually admissible to the same extent as the original

Question 5

Best Evidence/Secondary Evidence Rule

Answer 5

Federal: “Best Evidence”, CA: “Secondary Evidence”

When a party seeks to prove the contents of a writing, the best evidence rule requires the party to produce the original.

A duplicate (i.e., an exact copy made by mechanical means, like a photocopy or carbon copy) is usually admissible to the same extent as the original.

Handwritten reconstructions or oral testimony is not admissible to prove the contents of the writing unless a satisfactory excuse is given for the non-production of the original.

CA: Duplicates AND any written secondary evidence of the contents of the original (reconstructed or handwritten copies) are all usually admissible unless it would be unfair or a genuine question of authenticity is raised. Oral testimony still not admissible.