In a case for specific performance and damages, plaintiff presented photocopies of contracts; should the objection under the best evidence rule be sustained?

In a case for specific performance and damages, plaintiff presented photocopies of contracts; should the objection under the best evidence rule be sustained?

• A. Yes, the best evidence rule requires the original contract.
• B. No, photocopies are always admissible.
• C. No, the best evidence rule applies only when the contents of the document are at issue; existence is not.
• D. Yes, unless the original is lost.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is how the best evidence rule is applied. It governs proving the terms of a writing, not merely proving that a writing exists. If the dispute is about whether a contract actually exists, the contents of the contract aren’t necessarily at issue; demonstrating that an agreement was made can be done with a photocopy as secondary evidence. In a suit for specific performance and damages, proving that a contract existed is essential, and a photocopy can be admissible to establish that there was an agreement even if the exact terms are not being contested at that moment. If later the terms themselves become central to the dispute, the original might be required to prove those terms, or a genuine authenticity issue could alter admissibility. But for proving existence alone, photocopies are not barred by the best evidence rule. That’s why the objection based on best evidence wouldn’t automatically succeed here.

The key idea is how the best evidence rule is applied. It governs proving the terms of a writing, not merely proving that a writing exists. If the dispute is about whether a contract actually exists, the contents of the contract aren’t necessarily at issue; demonstrating that an agreement was made can be done with a photocopy as secondary evidence. In a suit for specific performance and damages, proving that a contract existed is essential, and a photocopy can be admissible to establish that there was an agreement even if the exact terms are not being contested at that moment.

If later the terms themselves become central to the dispute, the original might be required to prove those terms, or a genuine authenticity issue could alter admissibility. But for proving existence alone, photocopies are not barred by the best evidence rule. That’s why the objection based on best evidence wouldn’t automatically succeed here.