Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Nebraska · Chapter 27 — Courts; Rules of Evidence

27-1002. Rule 1002. Requirement of original; exception.

547 words·~2 min read·/ne/chapter-27/27-1002

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress or of the Legislature of the State of Nebraska or by other rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Nebraska.
This section is a rule of preference for the production of the original of a writing, recording, or photograph when the contents of the item are sought to be proved. Richter v. City of Omaha, 273 Neb. 281, 729 N.W.2d 67 (2007).
This "original writings" rule, which is sometimes inaccurately referred to as the "best evidence" rule, applies only if the party offering the evidence is seeking to prove the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph. State v. Decker, 261 Neb. 382, 622 N.W.2d 903 (2001).
The best evidence rule, which might more properly be called the "original writing" rule or, more correctly, the rule for "production of an original writing or document", is in reality a rule of preference for the production of the original of a writing, recording, or photograph when the contents of the item are sought to be proved. The original writing or "original document" rule does not set up a hierarchy for admissibility of evidence, but applies when a party seeks to prove material contents of a writing, recording, or photograph.
The purpose of this section is the prevention of fraud, inaccuracy, mistake, or mistransmission of critical facts contained in a writing, recording, or photograph when its contents are an issue in a proceeding. By its terms, this section applies to proof of the contents of a recording. State v. Kula, 260 Neb. 183, 616 N.W.2d 313 (2000).
The original document rule does not set up a hierarchy for admissibility of evidence, but applies when a party seeks to prove material contents of a writing, recording, or photograph. The purpose of this section is the prevention of fraud, inaccuracy, mistake, or mistransmission of critical facts contained in a writing, recording, or photograph when its contents are at issue in a proceeding. Equitable Life v. Starr, 241 Neb. 609, 489 N.W.2d 857 (1992).
Not error to admit in evidence a transcription of a tape recording which was itself in evidence. State v. Martin, 198 Neb. 811, 255 N.W.2d 844 (1977).
By its terms, this section applies to proof of the contents of a recording. Chevalier v. Metropolitan Util. Dist., 24 Neb. App. 874, 900 N.W.2d 565 (2017).
The best evidence rule is a rule of preference for the production of the original of a writing, recording, or photograph when the contents of the item are sought to be proved. Chevalier v. Metropolitan Util. Dist., 24 Neb. App. 874, 900 N.W.2d 565 (2017).
The purpose of the best evidence rule is the prevention of fraud, inaccuracy, mistake, or mistransmission of critical facts contained in a writing, recording, or photograph when its contents are an issue in a proceeding. Chevalier v. Metropolitan Util. Dist., 24 Neb. App. 874, 900 N.W.2d 565 (2017).
The best evidence rule, also known as the original document rule, states that the original writing, recording, or photograph is required to prove the content of that writing, recording, or photograph. Flodman v. Robinson, 22 Neb. App. 943, 864 N.W.2d 716 (2015).
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.