Authentication

To be admissible, a letter must be properly authenticated.{footnote}United States v. Real Property Located at Incline Village, 47 F.3d 1511 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. granted Degen v. United States, 116 S.Ct. 762, 133 L.Ed.2d 707, rev’d 116 S.Ct. 1777, 135 L.Ed.2d 102, on remand 87 F.3d 400, opinion vacated 87 F.3d 400 (letters from federal Department of Justice to Swiss authorities inadmissible because not authenticated).  {/footnote}
See also AUTHENTICATION; HANDWRITING.

Responsive letters.  A letter may be authenticated by showing that it was received in response to another letter which was addressed to the claimed author,{footnote}Cal. § 1420; 62 A.L.R. 583; McCormick § 192.{/footnote} or by showing that it is one of a series of related correspondence.

As Constituting Hearsay or Non-Hearsay

Letters are ordinarily considered hearsay.{footnote}United States v. Real Property Located at Incline Village, 47 F.3d 1511 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. granted Degen v. United States, 116 S.Ct. 762, 133 L.Ed.2d 707, rev’d 116 S.Ct. 1777, 135 L.Ed.2d 102, on remand 87 F.3d 400, opinion vacated 87 F.3d 400 (letters from federal Department of Justice to Swiss authorities inadmissible hearsay).{/footnote}
It has been held that where a witness in testimony adopts the contents of a letter as being true, the letter becomes part of the witness’ testimony and is no longer hearsay.{footnote}Amarin Plastics, Inc. Maryland Cup Corp., 946 F.2d 147 (1st Cir. 1991).{/footnote}

As Business Records

Summary of federal business records exception.  To be admissible under the federal rules, a business record must have been created at or near the time of the acts or events recorded.  It must have been created by, or from information transmitted by, someone with personal knowledge of the facts.  It must also have been a regular practive of the business to make and preserve records of that type.  This foundation must be laid by a custodian of records or other qualified witness.  Records fulfilling these requirements will be admitted unless there is some indication that they are not trustworthy.{footnote}FRE 803(6). {/footnote}  See also BUSINESS RECORDS.

Letters have been held  admissible hearsay under the business records exception if they were made in the regular course of business{footnote}

See also United States v. LaValley, 957 F.2d 1309, 1314 (6th Cir.)(letters from military base commander barring protesters from base), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 972 (1992); Haygood v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 995 F.2d 1512, 1517 (11th Cir. 1993)(letter from bank’s attorney to borrowers advising of imminent foreclosure erroneously excluded); Brown v. ASD Computing Center, 519 F. Supp. 1096 (S.D. Ohio 1981)(letter from supervisor to employee regarding performance problems admitted for purposes of summary judgment, court noting "ease with which Defendant should be able to comply with Fed. R. Evid. 803(6).")

But see Attorney General v. Irish People, Inc., 595 F. Supp. 114 (D.D.C. 1984), aff;d in part and rev’d in part, 796 F.2d 520 (D.C.Cir. 1986)(letters referring to entitiy’s possible affililiation with Irish Republican Army excluded because maker under no business duty to report this information).

Check Snuffer v. Motorist Mut. Ins., No. 86-1725, 1987 WL 44776, at *1-2, 4 n. 2 (4th Cir. Sept. 9, 1987)(admitting correspondence to supervisor relating to possible insurance claim).{/footnote} In the case of letters received from others, such letters have been held admissible where they were of a type regularly received and maintained.{footnote}United States v. Keplinger, 776 F.2d 678, 693 (7th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1183 (1986); Deland v. Old Republic Life Ins., 758 F.2d 1331, 1338 (9th Cir.1985)(letter receeived by insurance company from other insurors).{/footnote}

Resiidual Exception

Letters have been held admissible under the residual exception to the hearsay rule.{footnote}F.T.C. v. Figgie Intern., Inc., 994 F.2d 595, 608 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied 114 S.Ct. 1051, 127 L.Ed.2d 373 (letters to FTC complaining about defendant’s product); Attorney General v. Irish People, Inc., 595 F. Supp. 114 (D.D.C. 1984), aff;d in part and rev’d in part, 796 F.2d 520 (D.C.Cir. 1986)(letters referring to entitiy’s possible affililiation with Irish Republican Army).{/footnote}

[West sec. 318 (2) West 357, 378]

Best Evidence Rule

[West sec. 168]