Fre 1001 Case Study

Best Evidence Rule
It is a legal principle that holds an original writing, recording, or photograph as superior evidence to prove its content.

(a) Is there a writing under FRE 1001?
FRE 1001 (a) A “writing” consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form.

Here, as generally applied in federal courts, the Best Evidence (BE) rule is limited to the case where the contents need to be proven. The BE rule is applicable to the case because the contents of P’s and Mr. Morton’s responding emails are to be proven as what was actually written in these emails are being questioned. A BE objection raised by the defendant’s attorney may be sustained if no exception applies because P testified that she had conveyed her complaint to Mr. Morton via
e-mail, yet, P was talking about the content of her email message without actually presenting the message she claimed that she had sent to Mr. Morton. It is reasonable to presume that P’s email message contained letters and words in a written form and it was intended to dispatch the information electronically to its recipient. Similarly, the same explanation would apply to the responding email P claimed to have received from Mr. Morton.
Therefore, under Rule 1001, there is a writing of P’s complaint as well as of Mr. Morton’s response transmitted electronically.

(b) If you conclude there is a writing, FRE 1002, what constitutes the “original” of an email under the technical requirements of FRE 1001?
Rule 1002
Requirement of the Original
An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise.

Here, as established supra, these correspondences were transmitted electronically in the form of e-mails. Thus, “original” writing may be evidenced by presenting the record of these emails with their contents. However, an electronic mail itself is an intangible item and unlike a message written down on a piece of paper that is preserved in the form of traditional letters. Accordingly, an email does not produce an “original” writing in a tangible form. Hence, print-out copies of the email messages, of the messages subsequently attached to a separate email or forwarded to another recipient showing that the messages originated from P and Mr. Morton would suffice. The email messages forensically retrieved by a qualified person would also be sufficient.

(c) Can the evidence of the alleged e-mail and its contents be proven even though Mrs. Steinman says that her computer was
stolen?
Rule 1003
Admissibility of Duplicates
A duplicate is admissible unless there is a genuine issue as to the authenticity of the original. Rule 1004
Admissibility of Other Evidence of Content
When the original is proven unavailable in good faith, secondary evidence may be used to satisfy the best evidence rule. Unavailability of the original may be actual, through loss, destruction, or insusceptibility to judicial process, or constructive as when it is in the possession of an adverse party against whom the original would be offered.

Here, under Rule 1004, P’s testimony may sufficiently satisfy the best evidence rule if a reasonable person finds that the original emails are unavailable due to the loss of P’s computer in good faith, and that P’s testimony is trustworthy. The admissibility of P’s testimony regarding the content of the emails depends on whether the jury finds it to be reliable as well as probative and not unduly prejudicial. Further, Mr. Morton’s email in response to P’s complaint should be kept at the City as well because Mr. Morton presumably transmitted his email from his work computer. And thus, arguably, it is in the defendant’s control and the defendant is refusing to make the information available.

Therefore, the jury will decide if the evidence of the alleged emails and their contents can be proven by P’s testimony.