Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Best Evidence Rule
20 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Best Evidence RuleQuestion 1 of 20

A playwright sued a film studio for copyright infringement, claiming the studio's recent movie copied substantial portions of her unpublished play. To prove the contents of the original play, the playwright seeks to testify from memory regarding specific dialogue and scene descriptions. The playwright admits that she has the only copy of the play, a manuscript stored in a safe deposit box, but she did not bring it to court. The film studio objects to the playwright's testimony.

Is the playwright's testimony regarding the contents of her play admissible? Select one.

Yes, because the playwright has personal knowledge of the contents of the work she created.
Yes, because the play is an unpublished work, which is not subject to the best evidence rule.
No, because the testimony is offered to prove the content of a writing, and the original has not been accounted for.
No, because the testimony violates the parol evidence rule by seeking to introduce extrinsic evidence of a written work.
← Back to quizzes

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Best Evidence Rule

Practice Best Evidence Rule in Bar Exam (Uniform) with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Best Evidence Rule, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Bar Exam (Uniform).

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A playwright sued a film studio for copyright infringement, claiming the studio's recent movie copied substantial portions of her unpublished play. To prove the contents of the original play, the playwright seeks to testify from memory regarding specific dialogue and scene descriptions. The playwright admits that she has the only copy of the play, a manuscript stored in a safe deposit box, but she did not bring it to court. The film studio objects to the playwright's testimony.

Is the playwright's testimony regarding the contents of her play admissible? Select one.

  1. Yes, because the playwright has personal knowledge of the contents of the work she created.
  2. Yes, because the play is an unpublished work, which is not subject to the best evidence rule.
  3. No, because the testimony is offered to prove the content of a writing, and the original has not been accounted for. (correct answer)
  4. No, because the testimony violates the parol evidence rule by seeking to introduce extrinsic evidence of a written work.
Explanation: The best evidence rule applies when a party seeks to prove the content of a writing. Here, the playwright's testimony is offered for the very purpose of proving the content (dialogue and scenes) of her play. Under FRE 1002, the original writing is required. Since the original manuscript exists and is available to the playwright, her testimony about its content is inadmissible without producing the original or providing a valid excuse under FRE 1004 (e.g., it was lost, destroyed, or in the opponent's control). (A) is incorrect because while she has personal knowledge, the rule specifically requires the original document when its content is the issue to be proved. (B) is incorrect as the rule applies to all writings, published or not. (D) misapplies the parol evidence rule, which relates to the interpretation of contracts, not the proof of content for copyright purposes.

Question 2

A defendant is on trial for assault. His defense is that he was in another city on the day of the crime, June 15. To support his alibi, the defendant's friend testifies, 'I remember the defendant was with me on June 15 because that was the day I signed the lease for my new apartment, and he co-signed as my guarantor.' The prosecutor objects to the testimony about the lease, arguing that the lease itself is the best evidence of its contents and the date it was signed.

Is the friend's testimony about signing the lease on June 15 admissible over the prosecutor's objection? Select one.

  1. No, because the witness is attempting to prove the contents of a legally operative document without producing it.
  2. No, because the testimony is self-serving and lacks corroboration without the physical lease.
  3. Yes, because the contents of the lease are not a controlling issue in the assault case. (correct answer)
  4. Yes, because the best evidence rule does not apply to documents used to establish a timeline.
Explanation: Under FRE 1004(d), the original writing is not required if the 'writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue.' This is often called the collateral matters doctrine. Here, the controlling issue is whether the defendant committed assault. The lease is used only to fix a date in the witness's memory—a collateral matter. The specific terms of the lease are irrelevant to the case. Therefore, the testimony is admissible. (A) is incorrect because while the lease is a legal document, its contents are not what is being litigated; it is being used for a collateral purpose. (B) addresses the weight and credibility of the testimony, not its admissibility under the best evidence rule. (D) is an overstatement; if the document's date was itself a controlling issue (e.g., in a statute of limitations dispute), the rule could apply.

Question 3

A corporation sued a former employee for violating a non-compete agreement that was executed as an electronic document and signed using a digital signature service. To prove the terms of the agreement, the corporation's attorney offers a paper printout of the electronically signed document. The former employee's attorney objects, arguing that the printout is not the 'original' and that the best evidence rule requires the production of the native electronic file itself so that its metadata can be examined.

How should the court rule on the objection to the paper printout? Select one.

  1. Admit the printout, because a printout of electronically stored information is considered an original. (correct answer)
  2. Admit the printout, but only if an expert testifies that the printout is a verbatim copy of the electronic file.
  3. Exclude the printout, because the employee has raised a genuine question about the authenticity of the electronic record.
  4. Exclude the printout, because it is a duplicate, and the original electronic file must be produced on demand.
Explanation: FRE 1001(d) defines an 'original' of a writing or recording. For electronically stored information, the rule states that ''original' means any printout—or other output readable by sight—if it is shown to accurately reflect the information.' Therefore, the paper printout is considered an original, not a duplicate, and is admissible to prove the content of the electronic agreement. The employee's desire to see metadata might be a subject for discovery but does not render the printout inadmissible as a non-original. (B) is incorrect because expert testimony is not required for admissibility, although a witness with knowledge would need to provide a foundation that it accurately reflects the data. (C) is incorrect because merely demanding to see metadata does not, by itself, create a genuine question of authenticity sufficient to exclude the printout. (D) is incorrect because the printout is legally defined as an original.

Question 4

In a prosecution for insurance fraud, the government alleges that the defendant intentionally set fire to his own warehouse. An informant, who was present during a conversation between the defendant and an accomplice, agreed to wear a wire for a subsequent meeting. The subsequent conversation, in which the defendant made incriminating statements, was successfully recorded. At trial, the prosecutor calls the informant to testify about the statements the defendant made during that recorded meeting. The defense attorney objects, asserting that the audio recording is the best evidence of the conversation.

How should the court rule on the defense attorney's objection? Select one.

  1. Sustain the objection, because the recording is the best evidence of the contents of the conversation.
  2. Sustain the objection, because the informant's testimony would be inadmissible hearsay.
  3. Overrule the objection, because the informant is testifying from personal knowledge of the conversation. (correct answer)
  4. Overrule the objection, but only if the prosecutor demonstrates that the audio recording is unintelligible.
Explanation: The best evidence rule (FRE 1002) requires an original writing, recording, or photograph to prove its content. However, the rule does not apply when a witness with independent, personal knowledge testifies about an event that also happens to be recorded. Here, the informant is testifying from his own memory of the conversation he personally heard. He is not testifying to prove the contents of the audio recording itself. Therefore, his testimony is admissible, and the objection should be overruled. (A) is incorrect because the rule does not prevent a witness with personal knowledge from testifying about an event, even if it was recorded. (B) is incorrect because the defendant's own statements, when offered by the prosecution, are considered admissions by a party-opponent and are not hearsay under FRE 801(d)(2). (D) is incorrect because the admissibility of the informant's testimony from personal knowledge does not depend on the quality of the recording.

Question 5

In a federal tax evasion case, the government alleges the defendant, a business owner, underreported income for three years. The government's evidence includes thousands of the defendant's invoices, receipts, and bank records. To simplify the presentation, the prosecutor calls an IRS forensic accountant to the stand. The accountant has prepared a summary chart showing the total income received versus the total income reported for each year. The defense attorney had been given access to all the underlying documents months before trial. The defense now objects to the admission of the summary chart.

Is the summary chart admissible? Select one.

  1. No, because the chart is inadmissible hearsay created in anticipation of litigation.
  2. No, because the jury must be allowed to review the original documents to make its own conclusions.
  3. Yes, because the best evidence rule does not apply to the testimony of an expert witness.
  4. Yes, because the chart summarizes voluminous records, and the underlying documents were made available. (correct answer)
Explanation: FRE 1006 allows a party to use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The rule requires that the proponent make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying by other parties at a reasonable time and place. Both conditions are met here: the records are voluminous, and the defense was given access to them. Therefore, the summary chart is admissible. (A) is incorrect because FRE 1006 provides a specific basis for admissibility that overcomes hearsay or best evidence objections, provided the conditions are met. (B) is incorrect because the very purpose of FRE 1006 is to avoid requiring the jury to review voluminous records. (C) is an oversimplification; while experts have leeway, FRE 1006 is the specific rule that governs the use of summaries to prove content, whether by an expert or another witness.

Question 6

To prove that the defendant has a prior felony conviction for impeachment purposes, the prosecutor offers a copy of the defendant's judgment of conviction. The copy was printed from the court's official electronic database by the prosecutor's paralegal. It does not have a raised seal or a clerk's signature certifying it. The defense attorney objects, arguing that the document is not properly authenticated and violates the best evidence rule because it is not a certified copy.

Is the printed copy from the court's database admissible to prove the conviction? Select one.

  1. Yes, because a printout of an electronic public record is an original, and it can be authenticated by other means.
  2. No, because public records like judgments of conviction may only be proven by a copy certified as correct by the custodian. (correct answer)
  3. Yes, because the best evidence rule does not apply to public records used for impeachment.
  4. No, because the printout is an unauthenticated duplicate and therefore inadmissible under the best evidence rule.
Explanation: When you encounter questions about proving public records like judgments of conviction, you need to analyze both authentication requirements and the best evidence rule together, as they have special rules for official documents. The correct answer is B because Federal Rule of Evidence 1005 creates a specific requirement for public records. Unlike private documents, public records can only be proven through a copy that has been certified as correct by the custodian of the records or by a copy that complies with applicable statute or court rule. Here, the printout lacks both a raised seal and clerk's certification, so it doesn't meet this standard. Answer A is incorrect because while electronic records can sometimes be considered originals, this doesn't solve the authentication problem. Public records still require proper certification under Rule 1005, regardless of whether they're electronic or paper. Answer C misunderstands the scope of the best evidence rule. The rule applies whenever you're trying to prove the contents of a document, including public records used for impeachment. The purpose of the evidence doesn't exempt it from evidentiary rules. Answer D correctly identifies that the document has authentication issues, but incorrectly focuses on the "duplicate" aspect. The real problem isn't that it's a duplicate—it's that public records have specific certification requirements that this document doesn't meet. Remember this key distinction: while private documents can often be authenticated through various means (witness testimony, chain of custody, etc.), public records have stricter requirements and generally must be certified copies to be admissible.

Question 7

A homebuyer is suing a seller for fraud, alleging that the seller failed to disclose a known termite problem in the written disclosure statement provided as part of the sale agreement. The seller denies this, claiming the disclosure was truthful. The seller, who does not have a copy of the final agreement, seeks to testify that 'the signed disclosure statement contained no mention of termites whatsoever.' The buyer, who possesses the original signed agreement, objects based on the best evidence rule.

How should the court rule on the buyer's objection? Select one.

  1. Overrule the objection, because the best evidence rule does not apply when proving the absence of a matter in a document.
  2. Overrule the objection, because the seller is on trial for fraud and has a right to testify in her own defense.
  3. Sustain the objection, because the seller is attempting to prove the content (or lack thereof) of the disclosure statement without producing it. (correct answer)
  4. Sustain the objection, unless the seller can first prove that the buyer has the original and is refusing to produce it in bad faith.
Explanation: Testifying that a term is absent from a document is still testifying about the document's content. To prove that the disclosure statement did not mention termites, the seller is seeking to establish its content. Therefore, the best evidence rule applies, and the original document is required unless an exception is met. Since the buyer (the opposing party) has the original, the proper procedure would be for the seller to put the buyer on notice to produce it. If the buyer then fails to do so, the seller could testify under FRE 1004(c). But without that step, the objection should be sustained. (A) is incorrect; the rule applies to proving what a document does or does not contain. (B) is incorrect as the right to testify does not override specific evidentiary rules. (D) is close, but the objection is valid on its face; it is the seller's burden to invoke the FRE 1004(c) exception by showing the buyer failed to produce the document after being put on notice.

Question 8

In a federal tax evasion case, the government alleges the defendant, a business owner, underreported income for three years. The government's evidence includes thousands of the defendant's invoices, receipts, and bank records. To simplify the presentation, the prosecutor calls an IRS forensic accountant to the stand. The accountant has prepared a summary chart showing the total income received versus the total income reported for each year. The defense attorney had been given access to all the underlying documents months before trial. The defense now objects to the admission of the summary chart.

Is the summary chart admissible? Select one.

  1. No, because the chart is inadmissible hearsay created in anticipation of litigation.
  2. No, because the jury must be allowed to review the original documents to make its own conclusions.
  3. Yes, because the best evidence rule does not apply to the testimony of an expert witness.
  4. Yes, because the chart summarizes voluminous records, and the underlying documents were made available. (correct answer)
Explanation: FRE 1006 allows a party to use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court. The rule requires that the proponent make the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying by other parties at a reasonable time and place. Both conditions are met here: the records are voluminous, and the defense was given access to them. Therefore, the summary chart is admissible. (A) is incorrect because FRE 1006 provides a specific basis for admissibility that overcomes hearsay or best evidence objections, provided the conditions are met. (B) is incorrect because the very purpose of FRE 1006 is to avoid requiring the jury to review voluminous records. (C) is an oversimplification; while experts have leeway, FRE 1006 is the specific rule that governs the use of summaries to prove content, whether by an expert or another witness.

Question 9

To prove that the defendant has a prior felony conviction for impeachment purposes, the prosecutor offers a copy of the defendant's judgment of conviction. The copy was printed from the court's official electronic database by the prosecutor's paralegal. It does not have a raised seal or a clerk's signature certifying it. The defense attorney objects, arguing that the document is not properly authenticated and violates the best evidence rule because it is not a certified copy.

Is the printed copy from the court's database admissible to prove the conviction? Select one.

  1. Yes, because a printout of an electronic public record is an original, and it can be authenticated by other means.
  2. No, because public records like judgments of conviction may only be proven by a copy certified as correct by the custodian. (correct answer)
  3. Yes, because the best evidence rule does not apply to public records used for impeachment.
  4. No, because the printout is an unauthenticated duplicate and therefore inadmissible under the best evidence rule.
Explanation: When you encounter questions about proving public records like judgments of conviction, you need to analyze both authentication requirements and the best evidence rule together, as they have special rules for official documents. The correct answer is B because Federal Rule of Evidence 1005 creates a specific requirement for public records. Unlike private documents, public records can only be proven through a copy that has been certified as correct by the custodian of the records or by a copy that complies with applicable statute or court rule. Here, the printout lacks both a raised seal and clerk's certification, so it doesn't meet this standard. Answer A is incorrect because while electronic records can sometimes be considered originals, this doesn't solve the authentication problem. Public records still require proper certification under Rule 1005, regardless of whether they're electronic or paper. Answer C misunderstands the scope of the best evidence rule. The rule applies whenever you're trying to prove the contents of a document, including public records used for impeachment. The purpose of the evidence doesn't exempt it from evidentiary rules. Answer D correctly identifies that the document has authentication issues, but incorrectly focuses on the "duplicate" aspect. The real problem isn't that it's a duplicate—it's that public records have specific certification requirements that this document doesn't meet. Remember this key distinction: while private documents can often be authenticated through various means (witness testimony, chain of custody, etc.), public records have stricter requirements and generally must be certified copies to be admissible.

Question 10

In a dispute between a general contractor and a subcontractor, the subcontractor claims he is owed an additional $10,000. The subcontractor takes the stand and testifies, 'On March 15th, I gave the general contractor a bill for $10,000, and he paid me.' The general contractor's attorney objects and asks to question the witness. The subcontractor admits that he has a carbon copy of the bill he gave the contractor and a canceled check from the contractor. The attorney moves to strike the testimony about payment, arguing the documents are the best evidence.

How should the court rule on the motion to strike? Select one.

  1. Grant the motion, because the existence of the bill and check makes them the best evidence of the transaction.
  2. Grant the motion, because the subcontractor's testimony is hearsay without the supporting documents.
  3. Deny the motion, because the subcontractor is testifying to the fact of payment, an event he personally observed. (correct answer)
  4. Deny the motion, because the carbon copy and canceled check are duplicates, not originals.
Explanation: The best evidence rule applies when proving the content of a writing, not when proving an event that happens to be memorialized in a writing. Here, the subcontractor is testifying to the fact of payment, an event he participated in and has personal knowledge of. He is not attempting to prove the specific terms written on the bill or the check. Therefore, the best evidence rule does not apply, and his testimony is admissible. (A) is the classic misapplication of the rule. (B) is incorrect because the testimony is about his own actions and observations, not an out-of-court statement offered for its truth. (D) is irrelevant because the rule does not apply in the first place, so the status of the documents as originals or duplicates does not matter.

Question 11

A man is prosecuted for sending a threatening letter to a public official. The government's handwriting expert is prepared to testify that the handwriting on the letter matches the defendant's known exemplars. The original threatening letter was inadvertently shredded during routine office cleaning after being photocopied. The prosecutor seeks to have the expert base her testimony on a clear photocopy of the letter. The defense objects, arguing that the expert cannot provide a reliable opinion without analyzing the pressure and ink of the original handwriting.

Is the expert's testimony based on the photocopy admissible? Select one.

  1. No, because the destruction of the original constitutes spoliation of evidence by the government.
  2. Yes, because the original was not destroyed in bad faith, and the photocopy is admissible as secondary evidence. (correct answer)
  3. No, because a genuine question has been raised regarding the authenticity of the original, making the duplicate inadmissible.
  4. Yes, because an expert witness may base an opinion on facts or data that are not themselves admissible in evidence.
Explanation: This question tests your understanding of the Best Evidence Rule and expert testimony standards in evidence law. When you encounter questions about destroyed originals and expert opinions, consider both the admissibility of secondary evidence and the foundation requirements for expert testimony. The photocopy is admissible because the original was destroyed without bad faith, making it proper secondary evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 1004. The Best Evidence Rule requires originals for proving the contents of writings, but allows duplicates when the original is lost or destroyed through no bad faith by the offering party. Here, routine office cleaning constitutes innocent destruction, not deliberate evidence tampering. Additionally, a clear photocopy provides sufficient visual detail for handwriting comparison, which relies primarily on letter formation, spacing, and other observable characteristics rather than physical properties like ink composition. Choice A incorrectly assumes spoliation requires only destruction by the government. Spoliation requires bad faith destruction, which didn't occur during routine cleaning. Choice C misapplies Rule 1003's exception for genuine questions of authenticity. The defense challenge concerns the photocopy's adequacy for expert analysis, not whether the original letter itself was authentic. Choice D, while technically true about expert testimony, misses the real issue—this isn't about inadmissible underlying data but about using secondary evidence to prove document contents. Remember that the Best Evidence Rule focuses on the intent behind destruction, not just who destroyed the evidence. Accidental or routine destruction doesn't trigger spoliation, and photocopies often provide adequate foundation for visual analysis by experts.

Question 12

In a personal injury lawsuit, a plaintiff who was injured at a concert seeks to prove the defendant-promoter was negligent. The plaintiff alleges that the promoter's internal safety manual required three security guards at the stage entrance, but only one was present. During discovery, the plaintiff requested the manual. The promoter, who has the only copy, refused to produce it, asserting a dubious claim of proprietary information. The plaintiff filed a motion to compel, which the court granted, but the promoter still did not produce the manual. At trial, the plaintiff calls a former security guard to testify about the manual's three-guard requirement.

How should the court rule on the promoter's best evidence objection to the former guard's testimony? Select one.

  1. Sustain the objection, because the former guard's memory is not a reliable substitute for the manual.
  2. Sustain the objection, because the plaintiff should have sought sanctions for the discovery violation instead of offering testimony.
  3. Overrule the objection, because the promoter had control of the original, was on notice to produce it, and failed to do so. (correct answer)
  4. Overrule the objection, because the safety manual is not a legally binding document like a contract.
Explanation: FRE 1004(c) provides an exception to the best evidence rule, allowing secondary evidence of a document's content if the party against whom the evidence is offered (the promoter) had control of the original, was put on notice that the original would be a subject of proof at the trial or hearing, and fails to produce it. All of these conditions are met here. The promoter controlled the manual, was put on notice by the discovery request and court order, and failed to produce it. Thus, the former guard's testimony is admissible. (A) is incorrect because reliability goes to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility under this exception. (B) is incorrect because seeking sanctions is one remedy, but it does not preclude the plaintiff from using the FRE 1004 exception to prove the manual's contents. (D) is incorrect because the best evidence rule applies to any writing whose contents are sought to be proved, regardless of its legal status.

Question 13

A homebuyer is suing a seller for fraud, alleging that the seller failed to disclose a known termite problem in the written disclosure statement provided as part of the sale agreement. The seller denies this, claiming the disclosure was truthful. The seller, who does not have a copy of the final agreement, seeks to testify that 'the signed disclosure statement contained no mention of termites whatsoever.' The buyer, who possesses the original signed agreement, objects based on the best evidence rule.

How should the court rule on the buyer's objection? Select one.

  1. Overrule the objection, because the best evidence rule does not apply when proving the absence of a matter in a document.
  2. Overrule the objection, because the seller is on trial for fraud and has a right to testify in her own defense.
  3. Sustain the objection, because the seller is attempting to prove the content (or lack thereof) of the disclosure statement without producing it. (correct answer)
  4. Sustain the objection, unless the seller can first prove that the buyer has the original and is refusing to produce it in bad faith.
Explanation: Testifying that a term is absent from a document is still testifying about the document's content. To prove that the disclosure statement did not mention termites, the seller is seeking to establish its content. Therefore, the best evidence rule applies, and the original document is required unless an exception is met. Since the buyer (the opposing party) has the original, the proper procedure would be for the seller to put the buyer on notice to produce it. If the buyer then fails to do so, the seller could testify under FRE 1004(c). But without that step, the objection should be sustained. (A) is incorrect; the rule applies to proving what a document does or does not contain. (B) is incorrect as the right to testify does not override specific evidentiary rules. (D) is close, but the objection is valid on its face; it is the seller's burden to invoke the FRE 1004(c) exception by showing the buyer failed to produce the document after being put on notice.

Question 14

A corporation sued a former employee for violating a non-compete agreement that was executed as an electronic document and signed using a digital signature service. To prove the terms of the agreement, the corporation's attorney offers a paper printout of the electronically signed document. The former employee's attorney objects, arguing that the printout is not the 'original' and that the best evidence rule requires the production of the native electronic file itself so that its metadata can be examined.

How should the court rule on the objection to the paper printout? Select one.

  1. Admit the printout, because a printout of electronically stored information is considered an original. (correct answer)
  2. Admit the printout, but only if an expert testifies that the printout is a verbatim copy of the electronic file.
  3. Exclude the printout, because the employee has raised a genuine question about the authenticity of the electronic record.
  4. Exclude the printout, because it is a duplicate, and the original electronic file must be produced on demand.
Explanation: FRE 1001(d) defines an 'original' of a writing or recording. For electronically stored information, the rule states that ''original' means any printout—or other output readable by sight—if it is shown to accurately reflect the information.' Therefore, the paper printout is considered an original, not a duplicate, and is admissible to prove the content of the electronic agreement. The employee's desire to see metadata might be a subject for discovery but does not render the printout inadmissible as a non-original. (B) is incorrect because expert testimony is not required for admissibility, although a witness with knowledge would need to provide a foundation that it accurately reflects the data. (C) is incorrect because merely demanding to see metadata does not, by itself, create a genuine question of authenticity sufficient to exclude the printout. (D) is incorrect because the printout is legally defined as an original.

Question 15

A buyer sued a seller for breach of a written contract for the sale of a rare painting. The original contract has been lost and cannot be found despite a diligent search by both parties. At trial, the buyer's attorney seeks to introduce a portion of the seller's sworn deposition transcript. In that portion, the seller, when asked about the contract, stated, 'Yes, I admit the contract we signed on May 1st included a clause guaranteeing the painting's authenticity.' The seller's attorney objects on best evidence grounds.

Is the deposition transcript admissible to prove the content of the authenticity clause? Select one.

  1. No, because the deposition transcript is hearsay not within any exception.
  2. No, because a deposition is secondary evidence, and the buyer has not done enough to prove the original was not lost in bad faith.
  3. Yes, because the seller's statement is former testimony admissible since the original contract is unavailable.
  4. Yes, because the content of the writing may be proved by the sworn statement of the party against whom it is offered. (correct answer)
Explanation: FRE 1007 provides a specific method for proving the content of a writing that serves as an alternative to the other exceptions. It states that the proponent may prove the content of a writing by the testimony, deposition, or written statement of the party against whom the evidence is offered. Under this rule, the proponent does not need to account for the original. Here, the buyer is using the seller's (the opposing party's) deposition testimony to prove a term of the contract. This fits squarely within FRE 1007. (A) is incorrect because the seller's statement is an admission by a party-opponent under FRE 801(d)(2). (B) is incorrect because under FRE 1007, the proponent does not need to account for the original's absence. (C) misidentifies the applicable rule; while it might also qualify as an admission, the most direct rule making it admissible over a best evidence objection is FRE 1007.

Question 16

In a bank robbery prosecution, the prosecutor presents a surveillance video showing the robbery. The video is blurry, and the robber's face is not clear. The prosecutor then calls a witness who was in the bank during the robbery. The prosecutor asks the witness, 'Having just viewed the surveillance video in court, can you tell the jury who the person is in that video?' The witness is prepared to identify the defendant. The defense attorney objects to the question.

What is the best basis for the defense attorney's objection? Select one.

  1. The best evidence rule, because the video speaks for itself.
  2. The question calls for an improper lay witness opinion. (correct answer)
  3. The question is leading.
  4. The question calls for hearsay.
Explanation: This question tests the ability to distinguish the best evidence rule from other rules of evidence. The best evidence rule is not implicated here because the prosecutor is not asking the witness to describe the content of the video. The video has been produced. Instead, the prosecutor is asking the witness for an opinion about the identity of the person in the video. A lay witness may offer an opinion on identity, but only if it is rationally based on the witness's perception and helpful to the jury. Here, the witness's opinion is based on viewing the same blurry video the jury just saw. The witness is in no better position than the jury to interpret the video, so the testimony is not helpful and constitutes an improper lay opinion. (A) is incorrect because the rule is satisfied by the production of the video. 'The document speaks for itself' is a common but often misused phrase for a best evidence objection. (C) is incorrect as the question is not leading. (D) is incorrect as it does not call for an out-of-court statement.

Question 17

In a prosecution for insurance fraud, the government alleges that the defendant intentionally set fire to his own warehouse. An informant, who was present during a conversation between the defendant and an accomplice, agreed to wear a wire for a subsequent meeting. The subsequent conversation, in which the defendant made incriminating statements, was successfully recorded. At trial, the prosecutor calls the informant to testify about the statements the defendant made during that recorded meeting. The defense attorney objects, asserting that the audio recording is the best evidence of the conversation.

How should the court rule on the defense attorney's objection? Select one.

  1. Sustain the objection, because the recording is the best evidence of the contents of the conversation.
  2. Sustain the objection, because the informant's testimony would be inadmissible hearsay.
  3. Overrule the objection, because the informant is testifying from personal knowledge of the conversation. (correct answer)
  4. Overrule the objection, but only if the prosecutor demonstrates that the audio recording is unintelligible.
Explanation: The best evidence rule (FRE 1002) requires an original writing, recording, or photograph to prove its content. However, the rule does not apply when a witness with independent, personal knowledge testifies about an event that also happens to be recorded. Here, the informant is testifying from his own memory of the conversation he personally heard. He is not testifying to prove the contents of the audio recording itself. Therefore, his testimony is admissible, and the objection should be overruled. (A) is incorrect because the rule does not prevent a witness with personal knowledge from testifying about an event, even if it was recorded. (B) is incorrect because the defendant's own statements, when offered by the prosecution, are considered admissions by a party-opponent and are not hearsay under FRE 801(d)(2). (D) is incorrect because the admissibility of the informant's testimony from personal knowledge does not depend on the quality of the recording.

Question 18

A landlord sued a commercial tenant for breaching a five-year written lease by failing to maintain the property's sprinkler system. The landlord testified that the original signed lease was in his office safe, but the safe and its contents were stolen during a burglary two months before the trial. The landlord then sought to introduce an unsigned draft of the lease that he located on his computer, which he testified was identical to the signed version. The tenant objects.

Is the unsigned draft of the lease admissible? Select one.

  1. Yes, because the original was lost or destroyed, not in bad faith by the landlord. (correct answer)
  2. Yes, because the draft is a duplicate of the original lease under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
  3. No, because an unsigned draft can never be used to prove the contents of a signed contract.
  4. No, because the best evidence rule requires testimonial evidence about the contents, not another writing.
Explanation: Under FRE 1004, an original is not required, and other evidence of its content (including secondary evidence like a draft or testimony) is admissible if the original was lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith. Here, the landlord has provided a valid reason for the original's absence—a burglary. There is no indication of bad faith. Therefore, secondary evidence, such as the identical unsigned draft, is admissible to prove the contents of the original lease. (B) is incorrect because an unsigned draft is not a 'duplicate' as defined by FRE 1001(e), which requires a counterpart produced by a mechanical or electronic process that accurately reproduces the original (e.g., a photocopy). (C) is too absolute; while the lack of signature goes to weight, the draft can be used as secondary evidence of the original's terms under FRE 1004. (D) is incorrect because FRE 1004 allows for 'other evidence,' which includes both testimony and other writings.

Question 19

A defendant is charged with grand larceny for stealing a truck. The prosecution's theory is that the defendant hot-wired the truck and drove it away. A key piece of evidence is the truck's steering column, which shows clear signs of tampering around the ignition. The truck itself is impounded in a police lot. The prosecutor, instead of producing the truck or photographs, asks the arresting officer to describe the damage he observed on the steering column. The defense attorney objects.

What is the defense attorney's best argument for the objection? Select one.

  1. Best evidence rule, because the damaged steering column is a 'writing' whose content the officer is describing.
  2. Lack of foundation, because the officer is not an expert in auto mechanics or theft.
  3. Unfair prejudice, because a verbal description is more likely to inflame the jury than the physical evidence itself.
  4. The testimony is admissible, and there is no valid objection under the best evidence rule. (correct answer)
Explanation: The best evidence rule applies to writings, recordings, and photographs. It does not apply to real evidence or chattels, like a steering column, unless the chattel has an inscription whose words are what need to be proved (e.g., the serial number, if that were the issue). Here, the officer is describing the physical condition (the damage) of an object based on his personal observation. This does not implicate the best evidence rule. Therefore, the testimony is admissible, and the objection is not valid. (A) is incorrect because a steering column is not a writing. (B) is incorrect because a lay witness can testify about their personal observations of physical damage. (C) is a weak argument; the physical evidence itself is likely to be more prejudicial than a description.

Question 20

A playwright sued a film studio for copyright infringement, claiming the studio's recent movie copied substantial portions of her unpublished play. To prove the contents of the original play, the playwright seeks to testify from memory regarding specific dialogue and scene descriptions. The playwright admits that she has the only copy of the play, a manuscript stored in a safe deposit box, but she did not bring it to court. The film studio objects to the playwright's testimony.

Is the playwright's testimony regarding the contents of her play admissible? Select one.

  1. Yes, because the playwright has personal knowledge of the contents of the work she created.
  2. Yes, because the play is an unpublished work, which is not subject to the best evidence rule.
  3. No, because the testimony is offered to prove the content of a writing, and the original has not been accounted for. (correct answer)
  4. No, because the testimony violates the parol evidence rule by seeking to introduce extrinsic evidence of a written work.
Explanation: The best evidence rule applies when a party seeks to prove the content of a writing. Here, the playwright's testimony is offered for the very purpose of proving the content (dialogue and scenes) of her play. Under FRE 1002, the original writing is required. Since the original manuscript exists and is available to the playwright, her testimony about its content is inadmissible without producing the original or providing a valid excuse under FRE 1004 (e.g., it was lost, destroyed, or in the opponent's control). (A) is incorrect because while she has personal knowledge, the rule specifically requires the original document when its content is the issue to be proved. (B) is incorrect as the rule applies to all writings, published or not. (D) misapplies the parol evidence rule, which relates to the interpretation of contracts, not the proof of content for copyright purposes.