Hearsay
Data Compilations Automatically Generated by a Computer
Federal Procedure
(…) Regarding the summary-report logs, we agree with the district court’s conclusion that the logs at issue do not constitute hearsay. The hearsay rule applies only to out-of-court statements, Fed. R. Evid. 801(c)(1), and the rule defines a “statement” as “a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion,” Fed. R. Evid. 801(a). The “written assertion” here was not made by a “person”; the court instead found, and the defendants do not contest, that the logs were data compilations automatically generated by a computer. This means that the logs are not hearsay. See Patterson v. City of Akron, 619 F. App’x 462, 479–80 (6th Cir. 2015) (holding that a Taser Report was “merely a report of raw data produced by a machine” and thus did not constitute hearsay) (collecting similar cases); United States v. Lamons, 532 F.3d 1251, 1263–64 (11th Cir. 2008) (concluding that a computer-generated spreadsheet of telephone billing data was not hearsay).
(U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, March 24, 2021, LYNGAAS v. CURADEN AG, Docket Nos. 20-1199/1200/1243, p. 22, recommended for publication)
No comments:
Post a Comment