Madison-68 Corp. v Malpass 2009 NY Slip Op 06154 (1st
Dept. 2009)
“Plaintiff's objection, made under the best evidence rule, to the admission of the lease rider was properly overruled because it had offered into evidence a copy of the same document.”
First, we saw the end of the New York rule. Now, we have a curtailment of the Best Evidence rule. I am not sure we can cite to Prince Richardson, the Farrell edition, in order to fully understand New York evidence law. Henry David Thoreau said it best: “Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This isn't really a Best Evidence Rule case. Once you've offered a document into evidence, you can't challenge the admissibility of it under ANY rule, and this isn't a new development.
Damin,
You raise a good point. The point I really meant to raise was that it was interesting that the Appellate Division, First Department even discussed the best evidence rule. My take on this is that the Court is inquiring as to why the copy of a document would not, in the first instance, be valid. In essence, I believe that the burden in demonstrating that a copy differs from the original or that a medical record of a Plaintiff Assignor (without a foundation) differs from the actual copy is on the objector. We saw this in Pan Chiropractor v. Mercury.
Post a Comment