⚡ 10-Second Rule
To prove what a paper says, show the paper — or a copy, or a good excuse.
🧒 ELI-10 Scene
Ava says her library book isn't due yet. "The slip says next Friday," she tells Ms. Park, the librarian. Ms. Park shakes her head: if the slip's words are the whole point, show the slip. A clean photocopy would satisfy her just fine. If Ava's puppy shredded the slip — through no fault of Ava's — she may describe it instead. But Ms. Park watched Ava return a different book yesterday. Ava can simply say what they both saw happen. The show-the-slip rule guards words on paper, not events people watched.
⚖️ Actual Rule
FRE 1002 states the rule: "An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise." The rule applies only when a party seeks to prove the content of a writing — because the writing itself has legal effect (a contract, deed, will, or judgment) or because the witness's knowledge comes only from reading the writing. A witness with personal knowledge of an event may testify to it even though a writing also records it. Under FRE 1001(d), an "original" includes any counterpart intended to have the same effect and, for electronically stored information, any printout or other readable output that accurately reflects the information. FRE 1003 provides: "A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate." Under FRE 1004, other evidence of content is admissible when the original was lost or destroyed without the proponent's bad faith, cannot be obtained by available judicial process, is under the opponent's control and not produced after notice, or relates only to a collateral matter. FRE 1006 permits a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot conveniently be examined in court, provided the originals or duplicates are made available to the other parties.
ELI-10 translation: the show-the-paper rule wakes up only when the paper's words are the point — and copies, excuses, and tidy charts can stand in.
🔍 Ask These Questions
- Is the evidence offered to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph? (Is the point "here is what the paper says"?)
- Does the writing have independent legal effect, or is it the witness's only source? (The paper matters when the paper is the deal, or the teller only read about it.)
- Does the witness have personal knowledge of the event itself? Then the rule never applies. (If you watched it happen, just say so — no paper needed.)
- Is a duplicate offered? It works like the original unless authenticity is genuinely disputed or admission would be unfair. (A clean photocopy usually does the job.)
- Is the original excused under FRE 1004 — innocently lost or destroyed, unobtainable, withheld by the opponent, or collateral? (A good excuse unlocks other proof, like describing the paper.)
- Are the records voluminous? A summary may come in if the originals are made available. (A mountain of paper can enter as one tidy chart.)
⚠️ Bar Trap
Exam language: Whenever any writing lurks in the facts, examiners lodge a "best evidence" objection to ordinary eyewitness testimony. The rule bars only proof of a writing's contents; testimony from personal knowledge of the underlying event requires no document, even if a document also recorded it. The mirror-image trap is the rule's misleading name — there is no general duty to produce the "best" available evidence.
ELI-10: The show-the-paper rule wakes up only when the paper's words are the point. Seeing something happen never requires paper. And courts never demand your "best" proof overall.
🧪 Question
A landlord sued his former tenant in a federal diversity action, alleging the tenant vacated owing $1,200 in August rent. At trial, the tenant testifies: "On August 1, I handed the landlord $1,200 in cash in the building lobby, and he counted it in front of me." The tenant mentions on cross-examination that the landlord wrote out a receipt at the time, which the tenant has not produced or accounted for. The landlord's counsel moves to strike the tenant's testimony about the payment under the best evidence rule.
How should the court rule on the motion?
(A) Grant it, because the receipt is the best evidence of the payment. (B) Deny it, because the tenant testified to the payment from personal knowledge, not to the contents of the receipt. (C) Deny it, because a photocopy of the receipt would be equally admissible as a duplicate. (D) Grant it, unless the tenant first proves the receipt was lost or destroyed without his bad faith.
Answer: (B). The tenant is proving the event of payment, which he personally made and witnessed, not the contents of any writing. FRE 1002 is never triggered, so the receipt's absence is irrelevant to admissibility.
💡 Why the Wrong Answers Are Wrong
- (A) assumes a general hierarchy of proof; the rule governs only attempts to prove a writing's contents, and payment is an event.
- (C) reaches the right result for an irrelevant reason — the duplicates rule matters only after FRE 1002 applies, and it never does here.
- (D) demands an FRE 1004 excuse, but excuses matter only when the rule is triggered in the first place.
- ELI-10: The misconception is thinking a paper trail always beats a person's memory. If you lived the event, you may simply tell it.
