Zinovy Brodsky - Page 114




                                       - 55 -                                         
          contends remain at issue in this case, respondent objects under             
          FRE 1002 to 26 of them (the material entries that are the subject           
          of respondent’s evidentiary objection).14                                   
               FRE 1002 provides:  “To prove the content of a writing,                
          recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or               
          photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these               
          rules or by Act of Congress.”  For purposes of FRE 1001 through             
          1008, entitled “Contents of Writings, Recordings and Photo-                 
          graphs”, an “original” of a writing is defined as “the writing              
          * * * itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect            
          by a person executing or issuing it.”  FRE 1001(3).  For those              
          purposes, a “duplicate” of a writing is defined as “a counterpart           
          produced by the same impression as the original, * * * or by                
          other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduces the                 
          original.”  FRE 1001(4).  A duplicate is admissible to the same             
          extent as an original “unless (1) a genuine question is raised as           


               14As indicated above, respondent objects to the admission of           
          only those entries in respondent’s workpapers for which the                 
          underlying documents establishing the respective payors listed in           
          such entries are not part of the record in this case.  Respondent           
          indicates on brief that respondent objects to 29 of the 51                  
          entries that relate to deposits that petitioner contends remain             
          at issue in this case.  However, three of those entries listed              
          payors which the parties stipulated and with respect to which the           
          underlying documents establishing the identities of such payors             
          are part of the record.  We construe and shall treat respondent’s           
          evidentiary objection as pertaining to only 26 of the 51 entries            
          which relate to deposits that petitioner contends remain at issue           
          in this case.  Respondent also objects under FRE 1002 to certain            
          other entries in respondent’s workpapers that do not pertain to             
          any of the deposits that petitioner contends remain at issue. We            
          shall not specifically address those other entries.                         





Page:  Previous  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011