Self-authenticating document
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009) |
| Evidence |
|---|
| Part of the common law series |
| Types of evidence |
| Testimony · Documentary Real (physical) · Digital Exculpatory · Scientific Demonstrative Eyewitness identification Genetic (DNA) · Lies |
| Relevance |
| Burden of proof · Laying a foundation Public policy exclusions · Spoliation · Character · Habit · Similar fact |
| Authentication |
| Chain of custody Judicial notice · Best evidence rule Self-authenticating document Ancient document Hague Evidence Convention |
| Witnesses |
| Competence · Privilege Direct examination Cross-examination · Redirect Impeachment · Recorded recollection Expert witness · Dead Man's Statute |
| Hearsay and exceptions |
| in English law · in United States law Confessions · Business records Excited utterance · Dying declaration Party admission · Ancient document Declaration against interest Present sense impression · Res gestae Learned treatise · Implied assertion |
| Other common law areas |
| Contract · Tort · Property Wills; trusts and estates Criminal law |
A self-authenticating document, under the law of evidence in the United States, is any document that can be admitted into evidence at a trial without proof being submitted to support the claim that the document is what it appears to be. Several categories of documents are deemed to be self-authenticating:
- Certified copy of public or business records;
- Official publications of government agencies;
- Newspaper articles;
- Trade inscriptions, such as labels on products;
- Acknowledged documents (wherein the signer also gets a paper notarized); and
- Commercial paper under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Although most U.S. states have evidentiary rules similar to the Federal Rules of Evidence, the California Evidence Code diverges significantly from the FRE in that it does not treat trade inscriptions as self-authenticating.[1] This means that if a defendant does not stipulate to the authenticity and accuracy of a trade inscription, the plaintiff must use expert testimony to establish the authenticity of the inscription and to get around the obvious hearsay issue (to establish, based on common practice within the trade, that the product is what the inscription says it is).
[edit] References
- ^ See Dicola v. White Brothers Performance Prods., 158 Cal. App. 4th 666 (2008) (holding that product label was hearsay).
  |
This article relating to law in the United States, or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
