Title VII. Evidence (Chapters 90-92) Chapter 90. Evidence Code (Refs & Annos)
90. 955. Public records
(1) The contents of an official record or of a document authorized to be recorded or filed, and actually recordedor filed, with a governmental agency, either federal, state, county, or municipal, in a place where officialrecords or documents are ordinarily filed, including data compilations in any form, may be proved by a copyauthenticated as provided in s. 90.902, if otherwise admissible.
(2) If a party cannot obtain, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, a copy that complies with subsection (1),other evidence of the contents is admissible.
CREDIT(S)
Laws 1976, c. 76-237, § 1.
LAW REVISION COUNCIL NOTE--1976
Section 119.011 of the Florida Statutes defines a “public record” as any tangible thing made orreceived pursuant to law in the transaction of official business. This section does not govern personalor business records or records which are not required to be filed or recorded with a governmentalagency. Such materials are covered under §§ 90. 952-90.954. In view of the inconvenience to thepublic and custodian involved in the removal of public records from the custodial office, existingFlorida law follows the long-accepted position of allowing certified copies of public records to beutilized in evidence in lieu of the original. One early case followed the common-law rule and allowedsuch certified copies to be used irrespective of the presence of a statutory provision. Simmons v.Spratt, 20 Fla. 495 (1884).
Existing § 92.29, which presently provides for the admissibility of photocopies of certain records,would be narrowed. It provides that a photographic reproduction of a writing, whether or not certified,made by a governmental agency in the regular course of business, which is or may be filed andrecorded, may be admitted as an original whether or not the original is in existence. Section 90. 955requires a certified copy of a document which was actually filed and recorded. This section does notoverrule various existing statutory provisions which provide that photocopies of certain governmentrecords should be treated as originals. See Fla.Stat. § 339.32 (certain records of Department ofTransportation); Fla.Stat. § 382.50 (certain records of state registrar of vital statistics); Fla.Stat. §402.19 (certain records of Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services); Fla.Stat. § 409.385(certain records of Department of Family Services).
Subsection (2) This subsection provides for degrees of secondary evidence, i.e., reasonable diligenceto procure a certified or compared copy must be demonstrated before other evidence of the contentsmay be admitted.
Under the Uniform Photographic Copies of Business and Public Records as Evidence Act, Fla.Stat.§ 92.35, a business may destroy certain records and photographic copies thereof are admissible asoriginals. A party may use a certified copy of a § 92.35 photocopy under this section. For example,the microfilm records of a bank or the “Xeroxed” copies of deeds in a courthouse would both betreated as originals, and certified copies of them would be admissible if the prerequisites of this sectionare met.
Similar provisions are contained in Calif.Evid.Code § 1506 (admitting writings in custody of officeras well as public records); Fed.Rule Evid. 1005; Model Code of Evid.Rule 517; New Jersey Evid.Rule70 (document in possession of public officer); Kansas Code Civ.Pro. § 60-465.
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Prior Laws:
Fla.St.1978, Supp. §§ 92.11, 92.12, 92.121.
Laws 1974, c. 74-39, § 1.
Comp.Gen.Laws 1927, §§ 4386, 4387.
Rev.Gen.St.1920, §§ 2719, 2720.
Gen.St.1906, §§ 1519, 1520.
Rev.St.1892, §§ 1110, 1111.
Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21.
Laws 1846, c. 81, § 1.
Act Nov. 20, 1828, § 12.
Federal Evidence Rules:
For rule relating to public records, see Rule 1005, Fed.Rules Evid., 28 U.S.C.A.
Uniform Rules of Evidence:
For rule relating to public records, see Rule 1005, Uniform Laws Annotated, Master Edition, vol. 13.
Certificate of state officer, prima facie evidence of fact, see § 92.18.
Certificates issued under authority of Congress, see § 92.20.Certified copies,
Abstract of title, evidence, see § 703.08.Birth certificates, see §§ 382.015, 382.025.Consumer finance, see § 516.22.Death certificates, see § 382.025.Recorded instruments destroyed by fire, see § 695.15.Recording certified copies of deeds, mortgages, etc., see § 695.19.
Certified copies of records of certified copies as evidence, see § 92.13.Corporations, evidentiary effect of copy of filed document, see § 607.0127.Court records, admissibility and proof,
Circuit courts, judgments and decrees prior thereto, see § 28.14.County court records prior to 1875, see § 28.16.Final judgments and decrees of courts of record, see §§ 92.05, 92.07.Portions of records as evidence, see § 92.19.Powers of attorney of record for 20 years or more, see §§ 92.08, 92.09.State judgments and decrees generally, see § 92.07.Superior court records, see § 28.15.U.S. district court judgments and decrees, see § 92.06.
Deeds and conveyances, admissibility and proof,Certified copies of records of certified copies as evidence, see § 92.13.Destruction of recorded conveyances, rerecording, see §§ 92.25 et seq., 695.15.Portions of records as evidence, see § 92.19.Recorded deeds of 20 years or more, see § 92.08.Reversal of deeds, effect, see § 92.09.U.S. deeds and patents, copies as evidence, see § 92.14.
Hearsay exceptions, records admissible, see § 90.803.Maps and plats, photographs presented for recording, see §§ 171.091, 171.111.Microfilm copies of records,
Bills and joint resolutions, see § 11.07.Circuit court clerk, vouchers and cancelled warrants, see § 28.30.Financial institutions, see § 655.91.Highway patrol records, see § 321.23.Instruments filed for recordation, see §§ 696.05, 696.06.State treasurer, see § 17.64.Teachers retirement system ledger sheets, see § 238.03.Transportation department records, see § 334.196.Vital statistics, see § 382.004.
Pleading official documents or acts, see Civil Procedure Rule 1.120.Public records, examination, see § 119.01 et seq.Records destroyed by fire,
Abstracts, use as evidence, see § 92.25 et seq.Conveyances, see § 695.15.
Land title suits, see § 92.28.Sworn copies as evidence, see § 92.26.Wills, see § 733.207.
Requirement of originals, see § 90. 952 et seq.Self authentication of public records, see § 90.902.Tax deeds, evidence of title, see § 92.24.
LIBRARY REFERENCES
Criminal Law 429, 444.
Evidence 366 to 368.Westlaw Topic Nos. 110, 157.C.J.S. Criminal Law §§ 1025, 1028, 1030, 1032, 1044, 1046.C.J.S. Evidence §§ 634 et seq., 646, 647, 650, 655, 753 et seq.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Encyclopedias
Public Records, FL Jur. 2d Evidence & Witnesses § 343.
Treatises and Practice Aids
1 Florida Practice Series § 803.8, Public Records and Reports.
1 Florida Practice Series § 955.1, The Best Evidence Rule--Public Records.
3 Florida Practice Series § 450.1, Certificate of County Clerk of Authentication of Paper on File in HisOffice.
5 Florida Practice Series § 20:6, The Original Document Rule.
Wharton's Criminal Evidence § 130:10, Florida.
UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED
Code of Laws of United States, etc., conclusive evidence of original, see 1 U.S.C.A. § 204.
Government records, etc., admissibility of copies or transcripts, see 28 U.S.C.A. § 1733.
Statutes at Large, admissibility, see 1 U.S.C.A. § 112.
Treaties and public acts, etc., admissibility, see 1 U.S.C.A. § 113.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
Public disclosure of accident reports, Commerce Clause, federal highway safety improvement legislation,protection from discovery and admission into evidence of agency data identifying potential accident sites
or hazardous road conditions, see Pierce County, Washington v. Guillen, 2003, 123 S.Ct. 720, 537 U.S.129, 154 L.Ed.2d 610.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
In general 1
Authentication, federal records 6County records 8Deeds 16-19
Deeds - In general 16Deeds - Foreign deeds 17Deeds - Lost or destroyed deeds 18Deeds - Original deed accounted for 19
Documents, records, and proceedings, in general 3Federal courts, judicial records 13Federal records 5, 6
Federal records - In general 5Federal records - Authentication 6
Foreign deeds 17Foreign judgments and decrees, judicial records 12Foreign records 4Form of evidence of judicial records 11Judicial records 10-13
Judicial records - In general 10Judicial records - Federal courts 13Judicial records - Foreign judgments and decrees 12Judicial records - Form of evidence of judicial records 11
Lost or destroyed deeds 18Original deed accounted for, deeds 19Prior laws 2Probate records 9Real property records 14, 15
Real property records - In general 14Real property records - Records and proceedings in land office 15
Records and proceedings in land office, real property records 15Title certificates 71. In general
Witness examining public record equally available to both parties may testify as to matters not in recordwithout violating best evidence rule. Kent v. Knowles, 101 Fla. 1375, 133 So. 315 (1931). Evidence
175; Evidence 413
The court may require the party offering “certified copies” to produce or account for the original of suchcopies, if the same shall be deemed necessary for the attainment of justice. Thomas v. Williamson, 51 Fla.332, 40 So. 831 (1906).
The custodian of a record, having authority to certify a transcript thereof, has authority to specify in hiscertificate the particular record from which the transcript is taken, and such certificate is prima facieevidence of the fact certified. Mansfield v. Johnson, 51 Fla. 239, 40 So. 196, 120 Am.St.Rep. 159 (1906).Evidence 345(2)
Where an official register is admissible in evidence, certified copies of entries therein are also admissible,on account of the inconvenience of removing the originals. Bell v. Kendrick, 25 Fla. 778, 6 So. 868 (1889).Evidence 341
Independent of statute prescribing how official papers or certified copies thereof may be used in evidence,the rule is that every document of a public nature, which there would be an inconvenience in removing andwhich the party has a right to inspect, may be proved by a duly authenticated copy; the official characterof the record, however, must be shown and where a paper is proposed to be introduced as a copy of apublic survey by a public officer authorized to make it, it is necessary to show something more than thatsuch a survey, purporting to have been made by a person not shown or purporting to be a public officer,was simply copied from the original found in a public office. Simmons v. Spratt, 20 Fla. 495 (1884).
Certified copies of public records and papers lawfully kept in the office of the secretary of state areadmissible without evidence as to the whereabouts of the originals. Tuten v. Gazan, 18 Fla. 751 (1882).Evidence 343(6)
Certificate of acknowledgment as showing that officer was such as was authorized to take it was primafacie evidence of fact that he was such officer. Tuten v. Gazan, 18 Fla. 751 (1882).
Certificate by a custodian of a record that a paper offered contains a copy of all that may be material tothe case is not evidence of that fact. Bellamy v. Hawkins, 17 Fla. 750 (1880). Evidence 345(2)
A copy of a document or record duly certified by the officer legally in possession of the original is lawfulevidence equally with the original. Doe ex dem. Magruder v. Roe, 13 Fla. 602 (1869).
2. Prior laws
The mere fact that an instrument had been acknowledged for record did not make it admissible as evidence,in the absence of a statute to that effect. When such instrument had not been recorded in the public records,Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21, which provided that recorded deeds and mortgages or certified copies thereofwere prima facie evidence of recitals therein, had no applicability. Malsby v. Gamble, 61 Fla. 310, 61 Fla.327, 54 So. 766 (1911). Evidence 370(8)
Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21, was not a limitation upon the power of the legislature, so as to prohibit it fromchanging the rule of evidence as to the introduction in evidence of copies of deeds and mortgages, so longas it did not undertake to render inadmissible the class of instruments enumerated in such section of the1885 Constitution. Campbell v. Skinner Mfg. Co., 53 Fla. 632, 43 So. 874 (1907).
Under Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21, a certified copy of the record of any deed or mortgage could be admittedas prima facie evidence of the deed or mortgage, and of its due execution, provided it was made to appearthat the original was not within the custody or control of the party offering such copy. Bell v. Kendrick,25 Fla. 778, 6 So. 868 (1889). Evidence 343(3)
Act 1846, c. 81, giving to certified copies of any instrument of writing required or authorized by law tobe filed or recorded the same effect in evidence as the originals, referred only to such instruments as wereduly proved before the recording officer or some judicial officer, and recorded, in compliance with law.An acknowledgment by one of two grantees or bargainors of the execution of an instrument required bylaw to be recorded was not sufficient to entitle it to be recorded, and, if it was recorded informally, it wasnot entitled to be treated as a registered instrument; nor would the fact that the grantees or bargainors werepartners in trade make any difference. The act did not, therefore, apply to such a case. Sanders v. Pepoon,4 Fla. 465 (1852). Evidence 343(1)
Former statute (see Fla.St.1975 § 92.12) referred only to such instruments as were duly proved before therecording officer, or some judicial officer, and recorded in compliance with law. Sanders v. Pepoon, 4 Fla.465 (1852).
3. Documents, records, and proceedings, in general
Certificate showing sale of land by United States Direct Tax Commissioners is prima facie evidence of theregularity and validity of the sale and of the title of the purchaser. Billings v. Stark, 15 Fla. 297 (1875);Hill v. Vanderpool, 15 Fla. 128 (1875); Billings v. McDermott, 15 Fla. 60 (1875).
Duly certified copy of certificate of title to an automobile is admissible in evidence. Ham v. Heintzelman'sFord, Inc., App. 4 Dist., 256 So.2d 264 (1971). Evidence 341
In action against insurance carrier for recovery of compensation for injuries caused by alleged uninsuredmotorist, records of Financial Responsibility Division, office of Insurance Commissioner of State ofFlorida, were properly admitted to show absence of insurance by tort-feasor. Valdes v. Prudence Mut. Cas.Co., App. 3 Dist., 226 So.2d 119 (1969). Evidence 147
A certified copy of executive order signed by governor and attested by secretary of state under seal of thestate raises a presumption that such executive order was issued from secretary of state's office as is usuallythe case with executive orders of the governor, and if such were done Supreme Court might take judicialnotice of an executive order so issued and attested. Johns v. State, 144 Fla. 256, 197 So. 791 (1940).Evidence 46; Evidence 341
Tax roll is evidence of liens for assessments therein lawfully made. Gautier v. Town of Crescent City, 138Fla. 573, 189 So. 842 (1939). Evidence 333(4)
Where the record of the board of county commissioners kept by the clerk, whose duty it is to keep thesame, is produced and identified by him, it is admissible as evidence in any cause to which it may bepertinent. Johnson v. Wakulla County, 28 Fla. 720, 9 So. 690 (1891). Evidence 341
The execution of a bill of sale of a chattel to a married woman is not required to be proved before it wasrecorded, in order to authorize its introduction in evidence in an action based thereon. Mercer v. Hooker,5 Fla. 277 (1853). Evidence 343(8)
The copy of a decree granting lands, made by the Spanish governor of Florida, and certified by thesecretary of the Spanish government, to be a faithful copy from the original in his office, is admissible inevidence. U.S. v. Delespine's Heirs, 40 U.S. 226, 15 Pet. 226, 10 L.Ed. 719 (1841); U.S. v. Rodman, 40U.S. 130, 15 Pet. 130, 10 L.Ed. 685 (1841); U.S. v. Wiggins, 39 U.S. 354, 14 Pet. 334, 10 L.Ed. 481(1840).
In suit involving title to land claimed by United States under treaty of cession by Spain, copies of deedsof confirmation by Spanish governor of sales of land by Indians were admissible under rules of civil lawin force in the Spanish Territory under which deeds, upon being recorded, could not be taken out, andunder which copies were deemed to be original papers with same effect. Mitchel v. U.S., U.S.Fla.1835,34 U.S. 711, 9 Pet. 711, 9 L.Ed. 283. Evidence 175
Generally, simple certification by keeper of record is insufficient to admit public document of sister state.Hinson v. Hinson, App. 4 Dist., 356 So.2d 372 (1978). Evidence 348(1)
To properly authenticate a nonjudicial public document of sister state so as to make document admissiblein Florida courts, document should be certified by keeper of records as true copy of record in his custody;seal of keeper's office should be affixed, if he has seal; and then either judge of court of record or stateofficer with official seal should vouch for authority and incumbency of keeper, genuineness of his signatureand that official should affix his seal to the certificate. Hinson v. Hinson, App. 4 Dist., 356 So.2d 372(1978). Evidence 348(1)
Authentication of birth certificate was insufficient, although New Jersey Health Commissioner certifiedthat certificate was true copy of record filed in department of health and state seal was affixed, whereneither judge of court of record nor state officer with official seal vouched for authority or incumbency ofCommissioner or genuineness of his signature or affixed seal to certificate. Hinson v. Hinson, App. 4 Dist.,356 So.2d 372 (1978). Evidence 348(1)
Birth certificate, as public document, is admissible as prima facie evidence of truth of facts stated therein,when those facts are required by law to be furnished. Hinson v. Hinson, App. 4 Dist., 356 So.2d 372(1978). Evidence 334(1)
In suit for specific performance of oral contract to lease oil and mineral rights underlying Cuban land,certificate of registrar in Cuba and English translation thereof was inadmissible to show interest ofdefendant in lands involved, where translation of foreign language was not properly authenticated orproved, instrument was not offered in compliance with any law of state, question of defendant's title wasnot involved, and interest claimed by defendant was not derived from Cuban government. Alexander v.Bess, 123 Fla. 713, 167 So. 533 (1936). Evidence 366(5)
In a prosecution for living in an open state of adultery, a paper purporting on its face to have been issuedand signed by the deputy clerk of New York City, which had no seal of any court of office and was notauthenticated in any manner or identified, is inadmissible in evidence to prove marriage. Cobb v. State, 82Fla. 233, 89 So. 417 (1921). Criminal Law 444.12
A duly authenticated copy of record of court of another state with seal of the court annexed, of applicationfor a marriage license, a certificate that it was issued, and the return of officiating minister forming a partof that court's record, is admissible. Davis v. State, 76 Fla. 459, 80 So. 65 (1918). Criminal Law 430
The transcript of a judgment in a suit in courts of record of another state which does not show that processagainst the defendant was ever issued, or that plaintiff appeared by person or his attorney, is inadmissiblein an action thereon. Drake v. Granger, 22 Fla. 348 (1886). Evidence 348(2)
Documents purporting to be issued by the executive of a foreign state, and bearing its seal, are admissiblein evidence on inspection of the seal, without other proof of their execution. Groover v. Coffee, 19 Fla. 61(1882), appeal after new trial 20 Fla. 64, reversed 8 S.Ct. 1, 123 U.S. 1, 31 L.Ed. 51. Evidence 366(5)
5. Federal records--In general
Government had right to make its proof under business records statute (28 U.S.C.A. § 1732) and was notobligated to prove documentary evidence from state motor vehicle title certificate records by properlyauthenticated copies, in prosecution for interstate transportation of stolen vehicle. Thompson v. U.S., 1964,334 F.2d 207. Criminal Law 444.9
6. ---- Authentication, federal records
Copies of official records of Bureau of Health Insurance may be admitted into evidence only if theirauthenticity is certified by secretary of health, education and welfare or by a person to whom he hasdelegated his authority, and, absent such authentication, patient history files were improperly admitted intoevidence in prosecution of osteopath for filing false medicare claims on mere basis that they wereadmissible under business records statute. U. S. v. Mekjian, 1975, 505 F.2d 1320. Criminal Law
444.11
Whereas Rev.St.U.S. § 891, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1733, provides that copies of records in the general land office,authenticated by the commissioners, shall be evidence equally with the originals, and exemplifications ofany such records shall be of the same validity as if the names of the officers signing and countersigningthe same had been fully inserted in the record, the record of patents issued when Andrew Jackson waspresident, and Elijah Hayward commissioner of the land office, of which time the court takes judicialnotice, showing the patents as having been signed by “A. J.” as president, and “E. H.” as commissioner,are admissible in evidence, and the initials on the record are presumptive evidence that the names appearedin full on the patents. Liddon v. Hodnett, 22 Fla. 442 (1886). Evidence 366(1)
7. Title certificates
In buyers' action against seller for rescission of contract for purchase and sale of automobile because ofseller's alleged misrepresentation that automobile was a “demonstrator” and had never been the subject oflease or rental, notation on certificate of title that automobile had “previously been used as a long T lease”was sufficient to give rise to issue of fact as to whether automobile had been subject of long term lease,thus precluding summary judgment in favor of seller. Ham v. Heintzelman's Ford, Inc., App. 4 Dist., 256So.2d 264 (1971). Judgment 185.3(18)
A certificate of title to an automobile, the securing of which the law requires, is admissible in evidenceunder public records exception to hearsay rule. Ham v. Heintzelman's Ford, Inc., App. 4 Dist., 256 So.2d264 (1971). Evidence 334(1)
Certificate of title to an automobile constitutes prima facie evidence of what it purports to show. Ham v.Heintzelman's Ford, Inc., App. 4 Dist., 256 So.2d 264 (1971). Evidence 383(4)
Duly certified copy of certificate of title to an automobile is admissible in evidence. Ham v. Heintzelman'sFord, Inc., App. 4 Dist., 256 So.2d 264 (1971). Evidence 341
Exclusion of bill of sale from defendant to driver of autobus was not error in passenger's action for injuries,where defendant's ownership was shown by certified copy of his application for title certificate and byapplication for auto registration. Saunders v. Crawford, 122 Fla. 13, 164 So. 526 (1935). Automobiles
20
Proof of defendant's title to autobus by state registration records by showing certified copy of defendant'sapplication for title certificate and application for auto registration was sufficient in passenger's action forinjuries. Saunders v. Crawford, 122 Fla. 13, 164 So. 526 (1935). Automobiles 20
8. County records
Where the record of the board of county commissioners kept by its clerk, whose duty it is to keep suchrecord, is produced and identified by him, it is admissible as evidence. Johnson v. Wakulla County, 28 Fla.720, 9 So. 690 (1891). Evidence 341
9. Probate records
Where there was no evidence as to whether signatures of subscribing witnesses appeared tampered withwhen will was filed, and evidence failed to establish who had access to probate file from date will was fileduntil some question was raised as to its authenticity, state failed to show prima facie case that defendanthad knowingly uttered, published, altered or forged will whose subscribing witnesses' signatures hadconcededly been very inexpertly tampered with, and admission of will, without having first required stateto prove continuity of possession or custody, was error. Pate v. State, App. 1 Dist., 256 So.2d 223 (1972).Criminal Law 444.13
A certified copy of a will as “a true copy from the records of this office,” without any mention that the willhas been duly admitted to probate, is not legal evidence. Coffee v. Groover, 20 Fla. 64 (1883), reversed8 S.Ct. 1, 123 U.S. 1, 31 L.Ed. 51. Evidence 345(2)
Order of court to show removal of administrator and revocation of letters was admissible in evidence. Hartv. Bostwick, 14 Fla. 162 (1872).
10. Judicial records--In general
To prove some matter contained in record of a case other than the one being litigated a party must offerthe other court file or certified copies of portions thereof into evidence in the case then being litigated.Bergeron Land Development, Inc. v. Knight, App. 4 Dist., 307 So.2d 240 (1975). Evidence 340(1);Evidence 366(3)
Proceedings in one court are properly proved in another court by certified or exemplified copies of courtrecords. Oliver v. Haspil, App. 3 Dist., 152 So.2d 758 (1963). Evidence 340(1)
Introduction of original court files of other cases into evidence of case on trial is not encouraged; if thereare material portions of records referred to which are relevant to trial, transcript of such portions may beoffered. City of Coral Gables v. Brasher, App. 3 Dist., 132 So.2d 442 (1961). Evidence 340(1)
In suit against guardian's administrator for accounting, copies of proceedings in county court wereadmissible to prove guardian's admissions. Fisher v. Guidy, 106 Fla. 94, 142 So. 818 (1932). Evidence
251(2)
Original records in one judicial proceeding are not inadmissible as evidence to prove their contents inanother such proceeding. Florida Land Inv. Co. v. Williams, 84 Fla. 157, 92 So. 876 (1922). Evidence
338
Copies of any record, pleading, deed or instrument in writing, when the same is or may be required to befiled or recorded in any public office, when duly certified, are admissible in evidence with the same forceas the original might be, provided that a judge may require the party offering the same to produce oraccount for the original if necessary for the attainment of justice. Thomas v. Williamson, 51 Fla. 332, 40So. 831 (1906). Evidence 340(1)
11. ---- Form of evidence of judicial records
To prove some matter contained in record of a case other than the one being litigated a party must offerthe other court file or certified copies of portions thereof into evidence in the case then being litigated.Bergeron Land Development, Inc. v. Knight, App. 4 Dist., 307 So.2d 240 (1975). Evidence 340(1);Evidence 366(3)
Permitting defense counsel to read to jury court reporter's transcript of testimony plaintiff had previouslygiven at workmen's compensation hearing, at which plaintiff had attributed all his difficulties to priorautomobile accident and related that he had suffered little trauma or discomfort as result of subsequentaccident with defendant, was error in absence of showing that plaintiff's counsel had agreed that transcriptwas admissible without authentication and error required reversal in view of verdict that plaintiff takenothing. DeLong v. Williams, App. 4 Dist., 232 So.2d 246 (1970). Appeal And Error 1050.1(11);Evidence 366(7)
Traffic court docket sheet, on which there was printed “Plea of Defendant _____ Guilty.” and on whichonly written notations were charges, name of defendant, dates and notation “sentence suspended”, wasambiguous and did not comply with provisions of § 92.10 (repealed), at least in absence of testimony ofsomeone with knowledge of record to explain method of entries, it would have been error to admit docketsheet. Harwell v. Blake, App. 2 Dist., 180 So.2d 173 (1965). Evidence 366(3)
Where plaintiff in ejectment for another's use sought to prove title by showing a judgment for her husbandagainst defendant, an execution sale, and sheriff's conveyance to her, and her conveyance to the usee, acertified copy of the judgment was admissible, under Gen.St.1906, § 1522; F.S.A. § 92.05. Thomas v.Goodbread, 78 Fla. 278, 82 So. 835 (1919). Evidence 347
A certified copy of the minute entry of a circuit court judgment, entered in open court, is admissible as thebasis for a sheriff's deed, though the judge's name does not appear therein, and there is no proof that he
signed the entry. McKinnon v. Lewis, 64 Fla. 378, 60 So. 223 (1912). Evidence 340(1)
On a trial for embezzlement, it was not error to admit in evidence a certified copy of a verdict and judgmentin a civil case against defendant and others for the property, as against the objection of defendant that therewas no proof that defendant “was ever served with process or had his day in court,” and where defendant“asked that the whole record be introduced for the purpose of showing that the court struck the pleas inthe civil suit,” since if a plea was filed in the cause it to that extent gave defendant his day in court, andif the striking of the pleas rendered the subsequent proceedings in the civil action illegal, it was immaterial,as the introduction of the verdict and judgment was to show their existence, not their validity. Sims v.State, 54 Fla. 100, 44 So. 737 (1907). Criminal Law 430
The custodian of a record, having authority to certify a transcript thereof, has authority to specify in hiscertificate the particular record from which the transcript is taken, and such certificate is at least primafacie evidence of the fact certified. Mansfield v. Johnson, 51 Fla. 239, 40 So. 196, 120 Am.St.Rep. 159(1906). Evidence 345(2)
Where an original execution has been returned to the court which issued it, the clerk of that court, havingthe custody of such original, has authority under the statutes of this state to certify a copy of the original,and such certified copy is admissible in evidence without producing the original. Mansfield v. Johnson, 51Fla. 239, 40 So. 196, 120 Am.St.Rep. 159 (1906). Evidence 345(2)
It is the duty of clerks of the circuit courts, who have authority to record documents or to make entries inthe records of which they have custody, in the course of their official duty, to note on such records the dateupon which they record such instruments or make such entries, which notes become parts of such record,and the dates specified in such notes are to be taken as prima facie correct. In certifying such entries theclerk also has authority to certify such notes, and the certified copies are admissible on account of theinconvenience of removing the originals. Mansfield v. Johnson, 51 Fla. 239, 40 So. 196, 120 Am.St.Rep.159 (1906). Evidence 345(2)
A properly certified transcript of a judgment, signed by judge and entered upon the minutes of the circuitcourt during a term, taken from the minutes, when properly recorded in the record of foreign judgmentsof another county in 1891, became a lien upon the real estate of the judgment debtor in the latter countyfrom the time of its record; and a properly certified transcript of such recorded judgment from the recordof foreign judgments is admissible in evidence to prove the fact of such record. Mansfield v. Johnson, 51Fla. 239, 40 So. 196, 120 Am.St.Rep. 159 (1906). Evidence 340(5)
Under former statute making copies of records and judicial proceedings of any court in the state admissiblein evidence, when authenticated by the officer having charge of such records with the seal of the court,certified copies of the minutes of any court of record are admissible. Hoodless v. Jernigan, 46 Fla. 213,35 So. 656 (1903). Evidence 340(1)
Ex parte affidavits filed with the submission of a case in the supreme court in habeas corpus proceedings,and undertaking to set forth matters of record in the office of the supervisor of registration and clerk of thecircuit court of a county, that can be shown by duly-certified copies, are not proper or competent evidenceof the facts therein stated. Ex parte Pitts, 35 Fla. 149, 17 So. 76 (1895).
The final entry of a judgment on the record, without showing any of the previous files or proceedings on
which it should have been based, is insufficient proof of a valid judgment. Ashmead v. Wilson, 22 Fla. 255(1886). Evidence 366(7)
The whole record, or an authenticated copy, is necessary to prove a judgment, a mere extract from therecord thereof being insufficient. Walls v. Endel, 20 Fla. 86 (1883). Evidence 366(7)
A simple transcript of a judgment entry does not prove a judgment in a collateral proceeding. Enoughshould appear to show jurisdiction. Donald v. McKinnon, 17 Fla. 746 (1880). Evidence 366(8)
Copies of detached papers, severally certified to be copies of papers filed, and of minutes of the court,purporting to pertain to a cause, are not proper evidence of the proceedings and judgment when offered forthe purpose of showing a judgment. The process, pleadings, proceedings, entry of verdict and finaljudgment, forming the complete judgment record, or a copy thereof certified to be such record, and thewhole thereof, should be produced. Stark v. Billings, 15 Fla. 318 (1875). Evidence 366(7)
Copies of detached papers, severally certified to be copies of papers filed, and of minutes of the court,purporting to pertain to a cause, are not proper evidence of the proceedings and judgment when offered forthe purpose of showing a judgment. The complete judgment record, or a certified copy, should beproduced. Stark v. Billings, 15 Fla. 318 (1875). Evidence 366(7)
12. ---- Foreign judgments and decrees, judicial records
An affidavit of officer of corporate creditor purporting to give authenticity to foreign judgment and theexistence of the debt was not competent proof of the authenticity of a copy of foreign judgment. Jacksonv. Stelco Employees' Credit Union, Limited, App. 2 Dist., 178 So.2d 58 (1965). Judgment 943
The existence of a foreign judgment is a question of fact which must be proved. Jackson v. StelcoEmployees' Credit Union, Limited, App. 2 Dist., 178 So.2d 58 (1965). Judgment 945
Where the record of proceedings in the courts of another state was offered in evidence, and it did notappear that the statute of the state in which the proceedings were had had been complied with, the recordwas inadmissible. Porter v. Bevill, 2 Fla. 528 (1849). Evidence 348(2)
13. ---- Federal courts, judicial records
Duly authenticated copy of final judgment of United States district court which enjoined mortgage lenderfrom lending in interstate commerce was admissible to prove existence and legal effect of the finaljudgment where such evidence was relevant to the issue of financial ability of the lender in mortgagebroker's action against prospective borrower for breach of oral contract to obtain construction financingfor proposed apartment house. Furnari v. Goodman, App. 3 Dist., 242 So.2d 503 (1970). Evidence
175
14. Real property records--In general
Original mortgages must be accounted for before certified copies may be entered in evidence. Kight v.American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. of New York, 125 Fla. 608, 170 So. 664 (1936). Evidence 343(4)
To supplement certified copy of mutilated record to show grantor's surname in certificate ofacknowledgment, resort may be had to copy of entire deed, to impaired record and to testimony ofwitnesses. Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620, 119 So. 333 (1928). Evidence 343(3)
Certified copy of record impaired by fire was admissible though full name of grantor was not shown.Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620, 119 So. 333 (1928). Evidence 343(3)
In ejectment, where the only objection made to the admission of an ancient Spanish grant of royal title isthat it purports to be a copy, and is not properly certified by the lawful custodian of the original, objectionto the sufficiency of execution of the original is waived. Sullivan v. Richardson, 33 Fla. 1, 14 So. 692(1894), affirmed 18 S.Ct. 268, 169 U.S. 128, 42 L.Ed. 687. Trial 75
A sheriff's deed cannot be given in evidence without producing the judgment and execution under whichthe sale was made, such documents being necessary to show that the sheriff had authority to sell. McGeheev. Wilkins, 31 Fla. 83, 12 So. 228 (1893). Evidence 366(11)
15. ---- Records and proceedings in land office, real property records
Where a grant of Florida lands was made by a Spanish governor before the territory was ceded to theUnited States, a certified copy of such grant from the office of the keeper of public archives is admissibleto establish such grant. U.S. v. Percheman, U.S.Fla.1833, 32 U.S. 51, 7 Pet. 51, 8 L.Ed. 604. Evidence
342
Findings and acts of original United States government surveyor, the cadastral engineer of the federalBureau of Land Management, as shown by his field notes and plats, were official records of executivebranch of federal sovereign and were intended to be, and were, conclusively deemed correct, and were notsubject to examination and “correction” in courts of law; correction of original government survey had tobe made, if at all, by resurvey commissioned by same authority as original survey. State, Dept. of NaturalResources v. Bronsons, Inc., App. 5 Dist., 469 So.2d 214 (1985). Public Lands 25; Public Lands
28
A certificate made and sworn to by the register of the United States land office as to the contents of recordsof his office should not be admitted in evidence over objection. McGill v. Dartist, 69 Fla. 587, 68 So. 755(1915). Evidence 342
Where certificates from the United States General Land Office as to payments for land do not show thatthe land was fully paid for prior to issuance of the patent, they may be immaterial on the question of anequitable estoppel based on a supposed full payment prior to issuance of the patent. McGill v. Dartist, 69Fla. 587, 68 So. 755 (1915). Evidence 342
The exemplification of the record of a patent, recorded in the general land office, under the hand of thecommissioner and the seal of the general land office, is evidence of the facts therein contained. Ropes v.Kemps, 38 Fla. 233, 20 So. 992 (1896). Evidence 342
A certified copy of an agreement on file in the state land office, acknowledging a cash payment on certainlands, and agreeing, upon the part of the register, to convey the land to the purchaser or his assignee onpayment of the credit installments, and purporting to have been assigned by the original purchaser, and
credited with the payment of the deferred installments, is admissible, with a transcript of the entries in anofficial record kept by the register of the original sale, and the conveyance to the assignee, as secondaryevidence of the execution of the lost conveyance. Bell v. Kendrick, 25 Fla. 778, 6 So. 868 (1889). Evidence
342
It was the duty of the register of state lands, independent of any statute, to keep in his office a register ofthe sales and conveyances of land; and a certified transcript from the same of entries showing when andto whom land was sold, and when and to whom it was conveyed, is admissible as secondary evidence ofthe execution of a lost conveyance. Bell v. Kendrick, 25 Fla. 778, 6 So. 868 (1889). Evidence 342
16. Deeds--In general
For a deed to be inadmissible on ground of insufficiency of description so as to render it void, it must beapparent on its face that the land intended to be conveyed could not be identified and located. Whaley v.Wotring, App. 1 Dist., 225 So.2d 177 (1969). Evidence 353(14)
In ejectment action, deed containing two conflicting descriptions, each clearly and intelligibly describingentirely different pieces of land without other indication as to which parcel was intended to be conveyed,was properly excluded from evidence. Carson v. Palmer, 139 Fla. 570, 190 So. 720 (1939). Evidence
353(14)
The words “in witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal” appearing in certified copy of recordof conveyance create presumption that original conveyance had affixed thereto the seal of grantor and thatomission of seal from record was error of recording officer, and in absence of original instrument by reasonof loss or destruction or other affirmative proof that original instrument does not bear grantor's seal,presumption of its having been affixed will prevail. Adams v. Orange Realty Sales, 136 Fla. 844, 187 So.625 (1939). Evidence 383(3)
Person for whose use ejectment suit was brought was real plaintiff, entitled to lay foundation for certifiedcopy of deed. Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620, 119 So. 333 (1928).
Duly certified copy of record of deed, not in custody or control of party offering copy, is admissiblewithout proving execution, regardless of denial of execution in pleading. Atlantic Land & Imp. Co. v. Lee,93 Fla. 579, 112 So. 549 (1927). Evidence 343(8)
Where a certified copy of a deed is offered in evidence, a copy of the entire deed should be offered, and thecertificate of the clerk thereto should so show, and the practice of omitting therefrom the description ofother lands than those embraced in the controversy is dangerous and disapproved, even though suchomission might not under some circumstances render a copy of a deed so certified inadmissible in evidence.East Coast Lumber Co. v. Ellis-Young Co., 55 Fla. 256, 45 So. 826 (1908). Evidence 343(3)
Recording officers are not required to record official seals of public officers, and a certified copy of a deedduly recorded is not required to indicate the presence of such official seal thereon to render the sameadmissible in evidence. East Coast Lumber Co. v. Ellis-Young Co., 55 Fla. 256, 45 So. 826 (1908).Evidence 343(3)
Where certified copy of a deed is offered in evidence a copy of the entire deed should be offered, and the
certificate of the clerk should so show. East Coast Lumber Co. v. Ellis-Young Co., 55 Fla. 256, 45 So.826 (1908).
F.S.A.Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21, providing that deeds duly proven shall be taken as prima facie evidence,and certified copies of the record of any deed shall be prima facie evidence, where the original is not in thecustody of the party offering such copy, was not a limitation on the power of the legislature, so as toprohibit it from changing the rule of evidence as to the introduction in evidence of copies of deeds andmortgages, so long as it did not render inadmissible the class of instruments enumerated in such sectionof the Constitution. Campbell v. Skinner Mfg. Co., 53 Fla. 632, 43 So. 874 (1907). Evidence 339
An objection to the admission of a deed in evidence on the ground that the description was so uncertain andvague as to render it void should be overruled, unless it is apparent on the face of the deed that the landintended to be conveyed could not be identified and located. Walker v. Lee, 51 Fla. 360, 40 So. 881 (1906).Evidence 353(12)
A certified transcript from a record of an instrument which has been spread thereon, without any proof oracknowledgment of its execution as is necessary, is not admissible in evidence. Parker v. Cleaveland, 37Fla. 39, 19 So. 344 (1896). Evidence 343(8)
A deed conveying real estate of a husband was signed by him and his wife, but was not acknowledged byhim; and the certificate of acknowledgment by the wife stated only that she, on a separate examinationapart from her husband, acknowledged that she signed the deed voluntarily without any compulsion,apprehension, or fear from her husband. It was held that this was not sufficient to entitle the deed to berecorded, under McClel.Dig. p. 216, § 9, providing that, in order to procure the recording of such aconveyance, the execution thereof by the party making the same shall be acknowledged by such party, andthat therefore a certified copy of the record of such deed was not within F.S.A.Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21,making a certified copy of the record of a deed recorded according to law prima facie evidence of theexistence and due execution of the deed. L'Engle v. Reed, 27 Fla. 345, 9 So. 213 (1891). Acknowledgment
53; Evidence 343(3)
A certified copy of the record of a deed is not admissible in evidence as proof of the execution or contentsof the original, if the record has not been made upon the evidence of execution required by the statute.Kendrick v. Latham, 25 Fla. 819, 6 So. 871 (1889). Evidence 343(8)
A certified copy of a recorded deed is not per se evidence of the due execution of the original. Skinner v.Pinney, 19 Fla. 42, 45 Am.Rep. 1 (1882). Evidence 370(10)
Failure of a deed to show on its face that it embraced the lot in question, or that plaintiff did not show suchfact as the foundation to its introduction, is not sufficient ground for refusing its introduction in evidence,since the party is not required to locate the calls of the deed before offering it in evidence. Hogans v.Carruth, 18 Fla. 587 (1882). Evidence 353(14)
The general rule of law is that the recital of one deed in another is evidence of the fact therein recited, andsupersedes the necessity of establishing it by other evidence. Williams v. Keyser, 11 Fla. 234, 89 Am.Dec.243 (1866). Evidence 353(3)
It will be presumed that deed executed and proved in another state was properly recorded, though recorddoes not show seal or certificate showing authority. Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620,119 So. 333 (1928).
18. ---- Lost or destroyed deeds
Abstract of title may be introduced to supplement certified copy of record of deed mutilated by fire.Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620, 119 So. 333 (1928). Evidence 343(2)
Certified copy of record of deed injured by fire was admissible, in view of other evidence as to formercontents. Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. Mathers, 96 Fla. 620, 119 So. 333 (1928). Evidence 343(2)
Certified transcript showing when and to whom land was sold, and when and to whom it was conveyed,is admissible as secondary evidence of the execution of a 1st deed. Bell v. Kendrick, 25 Fla. 778, 6 So. 868(1889).
19. ---- Original deed accounted for
Original deeds and mortgages must be accounted for before certified copies may be entered in evidence.Kight v. American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. of New York, 125 Fla. 608, 170 So. 664 (1936). Evidence
343(4)
Certified copies of deeds should not be admitted in evidence until it appears that the original deeds are notin the custody or control of the party offering such copies. Florida Finance Co. v. Sheffield, 56 Fla. 285,48 So. 42, 16 Am.Ann.Cas. 1142 (1908). Evidence 343(3)
Under F.S.A.Const.1885, Art. 16, § 21, a certified copy of the record of any deed or mortgage may beadmitted as prima facie evidence of the deed or mortgage, and of its due execution, provided it be madeto appear that the original is not within the custody or control of the party offering such copy. It was heldthat an original deed or mortgage is the best evidence, and must be put in evidence, if it be in the custodyor control of the party offering the copy, and that he cannot use the copy as evidence until it has been madeto appear affirmatively that the original is not in his custody or control. Bell v. Kendrick, 25 Fla. 778, 6So. 868 (1889). Evidence 343(3)
West's F. S. A. § 90. 955, FL ST § 90. 955
Current through Chapter 274 (End) of the 2010 Second Regular Session of the Twenty-First Legislatureand Chapter 283 of the 2010 Special "A" Session of the Twenty-Second Legislature.
(C) 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
![Home [brba.org] · West's Louisiana Statutes Annotated Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure (Refs & Annos) Book I. Courts, Actions, and Parties Title I. Courts (Refs & Annos) Chapter](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5f5d3b28a45ed17f386f228e/home-brbaorg-wests-louisiana-statutes-annotated-louisiana-code-of-civil-procedure.jpg)
