- 56 -
to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances
it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the origi-
nal.” FRE 1003.
The material entries that are the subject of respondent’s
evidentiary objection are not “originals” or “counterparts”
within the meaning of FRE 1001(3), nor are they “duplicates”
within the meaning of FRE 1001(4). Rather, those entries reflect
information that certain of respondent’s employees obtained by
reviewing certain other documents obtained pursuant to respon-
dent’s summonses to petitioner’s banks. Unless the Federal Rules
of Evidence or an act of Congress provides an exception to FRE
1002 that is applicable to the material entries that are the
subject of respondent’s evidentiary objection, such entries are
not admissible.
Petitioner relies on two exceptions to FRE 1002 to support
his position that the material entries that are the subject of
respondent’s evidentiary objection are admissible to prove the
identity of the payors during the years at issue of certain items
that were deposited into petitioner’s accounts. The first
exception on which petitioner relies is FRE 1004(3), which
provides:
The original is not required, and other evidence
of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph
is admissible if–-
* * * * * * *
(3) Original in Possession of Opponent. At a
time when an original was under the control of the
party against whom offered, that party was put on
Page: Previous 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011