a. In general; preliminary matters; genuineness and validity. V. Documentary evidence. Smith v. Rentz, 15 L.R.A. 138, 131 N. Y 169, 30 N. E. 54. (Annotated) d. The mere calling for a paper or writ ing which is produced under order of the court does not make it obligatory on the party calling for it to put it in evidence. Laufer v. Bridgeport Traction Co. 37 L.R.A. 533, 68 Conn. 475, 37 Atl. 379. § 610. Putting whole writing in evidence. Putting entire conversation in evidence, see post, § 1127. Under stipulation as to reading evidence of former trial, see post, § 1128 e. Offer to put in evidence entire pleading containing irrelevant matter, see TRIAL, § 25 d. See also ante, § 609 b. distinct a. A party may always offer a and severable portion of a writing containing declarations or admissions of his adversary which tend to establish his position, leaving to that other the right to put such remaining portions in evidence which may serve to explain or qualify the admission. State v. Corpening, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1130, 157 N. C. 621, 73 S. E. 214. b. Putting in evidence a portion of the cross-examination of a party in a prior case to show his admission will entitle him to have all his evidence read, so far as it bears upon or explains the admission. Weeks v. McNulty, 43 L.R.A. 185, 101 Tenn. 495, 48 S. W. 809. c. The party offering in evidence a deposition taken in his behalf must present the entire deposition competent and pertinent to the issues involved. Walter v. Sperry, 44 L.R.A. (N.S.) 28, 86 Conn. 474, 85 Atl. 739. d. A plaintiff may introduce the remaining parts of a deposition which are relevant and competent, when defendant culls out and introduces certain portions of it. Walter v. Sperry, 44 L.R.A. (N.S.) 28, 86 Conn. 474, 85 Atl. 739. e. A severable and distinct admission in a letter tending to show guilt is admissible in evidence against the writer, although the remainder of the letter is lost or destroyed. State v. Corpening, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1130, 157 N. C. 621, 73 S. E. 214. f. The whole paper alleged to have been sold must go to the jury in a prosecution for unlawfully selling a paper devoted to the publication of criminal news. State v. McKee, 49 L.R.A. 542, 73 Conn. 18, 46 Atl. 409. b. Various particular documents. 1. Laws and ordinances, § 611. Laws. Best and secondary evidence of corporate b. A statute recognizing as evidence the proceedings of any legislative body "purporting on the face of the book to be printed by authority of the government" applies to a book compiled by an individual under statutes which are printed in full at the beginning of the book, and which recognize the compilation as authoritative, and make it evidence. Falls v. United States Sav. L. & Bldg. Co. 24 L.R.A. 174, 97 Ala. 417, 13 So. 25. c. Upon trial of an indictment for selling futures, the charters of the corporations through which defendant dealt, showing that they had no power to permit sales unless actual delivery was contemplated, are admissible in evidence. Scales v. State, 66 L.R.A. 730, 46 Tex. Crim. Rep. 296, 81 S. W. 947. § 612. - city charter. a. In an action against a city for injuries from falling on an icy sidewalk it is not error to introduce in evidence the charter of the city, which gives it the power to require the owner or occupant of any premises to keeep the sidewalks in front of and along the same free from snow or other obstruction, or the ordinances of the city which provide that the owners and occupants of the land shall clear the sidewalks of all accumulations of snow and ice within ten hours after the same have fallen or accumulated, under liability to a fine; the court being justified in assuming that such charter and ordinances were introduced not for the purpose of prejudicing the jury, and making them believe that the owner or occupant would be ultimately liable in the action, but for the purpose of showing an assumption of control by the city, and its construction of its duty in relation to the sidewalks in question, as well as the right of the plaintiff to rely upon such assumption. Jackson v. Grand Forks, 45 L.R.A. (N.S.) 75, 24 N. D. 601, 140 N. W. 718. § 613. - foreign laws. Secondary evidence as to, see ante, § 570. Opinion evidence as to, see post, § 904. Necessity of pleading, see post, § 1654 c. Due process in statute as to, see CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, § 674. a. Volumes of laws of a foreign state, which do not purport to have been published under authority of its legislature, and are not shown to be commonly admitted as evidence of such laws in that state, are not admissible to prove such laws in Iowa. Goodwin v. Provident Sav. L. Assur. Soc. 32 L.R.A. 473, 97 Iowa, 226, 66 N. W. 157. b. In an action to recover personal property which has been mortgaged in another state when rightfully in possession of the V. Documentary evidence. mortgagor, and afterwards brought into the state of Kansas and sold, it is not error to receive in evidence the statutes concerning chattel mortgages of the state where the mortgage was executed, if properly pleaded. Handley v. Harris, 17 L.R.A. 703, 48 Kan. 606, 29 Pac. 1145. § 614. Ordinances. b. Various particular documents. Best and secondary evidence of, see ante, § 573. Proof of passage or publication, see ante, § 596. To show negligence, see post, § 1271 e. Admissibility under general issue, see post, § 1679 i. Prejudicial error as to, see APPEAL AND ERROR, § 804 f. See also ante, § 612 a. a. An ordinance requiring vehicles, when meeting and passing, to keep to the right, is admissible in evidence on the question of negligence in a collision. Foote v. American Product Co. 49 L.R.A. 764, 195 Pa. 190, 45 Atl. 934. b. In an action by a municipality to condemn property for street purposes, an ordinance declaring it necessary to extend one of its streets across a railway is admissible in evidence for the purpose of proving the official determination by the city council of the necessity for the crossing. Grafton v. St. Paul, M. & M. R. Co. 22 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1, 16 N. D. 313, 113 N. W. 598. c. The ordinance of a town defining disorderly conduct and prescribing the duties of the marshal are admissible on a trial for assault with intent to murder the marshal while attempting to make an arrest, for the purpose of showing the marshal's authority to make arrests for misconduct such as that which he was informed the defendant was guilty of. Porter v. State, 2 L.R.A. (N.S.) 730, 124 Ga. 297, 52 S. E. 283. 2. Certificate; award. § 615. Generally. Mutual benefit certificate, see post, § 699 b. Weight given certificate of protest by notary public, see post, § 1542 b. Injunction against use as evidence of fraudulent certificate of birth, see INJUNCTION, § 192 c. a. A certificate showing the variation of the scale of a thermometer from standard instruments is properly admissible in evidence, together with the thermometer which it was made to accompany, in cases where the instrument itself is properly admissible. Hatcher v. Dunn, 36 L.R.A. 689, 102 Iowa, 411, 71 N. W. 343. § 616. Architect's certificate. a. An architect's certificate provided for by a building contract is admissible in evidence in an action for breach of the con tract. Shriner v. Craft, 28 L.R.A. (N.S.) 450, 166 Ala. 146, 51 So. 884. § 618. Clerk's certificate. a. A certificate of the clerk that he has mailed a notice of scire facias addressed to the defendant, which under Ill. Rev. Stat. chap. 22, § 12, is declared to be evidence, is prima facie evidence that the notice so sent by mail was received. Bickerdike v. Allen, 29 L.R.A. 782, 157 Ill. 95, 41 N. E. 740. § 619. Marriage certificate. Marriage record, see post, § 624. a. A certificate purporting to be an original marriage certificate is admissible, in connection with the testimony of the alleged wife, to prove marriage. State v. Schweitzer, 6 L.R.A. 125, 57 Conn. 532, 18 Atl. 787. b. The constitutional right of an accused does not exclude, in a criminal prosecution, to confront the witnesses against him the very time of the marriage by the rabbi the use of a certificate of marriage made at who performed the ceremony. State v. Behrman, 25 L.R.A. 449, 114 N. C. 797, 19 S. E. 220. c. A paper purporting to be an original certificate of marriage by a rabbi in a forseal of the official minister, is admissible as eign country, verified by the signature and res gestæ to prove the marriage, in a criminal prosecution, where one of the parties testifies that it was given to her at the time of the marriage. State v. Behrman, 25 L.R.A. 449, 114 N. C. 797, 19 S. E. 220. § 620. Death certificate. Inadmissibility as secondary evidence, see ante, § 561 b. a. A coroner's certificate of death is not admissible in evidence in an action to recover damages for the alleged negligent killing of a person, upon the question of the cause of death. District of Columbia V. Washington, L.R.A.1916C, 379, 44 App. D. C. 120. b. A death certificate filed by the beneficiary with a life insurance company in proof of loss is not evidence of any disease suffered by insured several years prior to death. Askey v. New York L. Îns. Co. L.R.A.1918F, 267, 102 Wash. 27, 172 Pac. 887. § 621. Naturalization certificate. a. A certificate of naturalization of a person since deceased is admissible without further proof as evidence of this citizenship, upon the question of the forum having jua. The fact of probate of a will in a risdiction of proceedings to administer his § 617. Judge's certificate. V. Documentary evidence. b. Various particular documents. estate. Newcomb v. Newcomb, 51 L.R.A. | the sewer across private property pursuant 419, 108 Ky. 582, 57 S. W. 2. Authentication of, see ante, § 598. Coroner's inquest, see post, § 638. To prove genuineness of other writing, see post, § 684 e. Weight or sufficiency of, see post, § 1542. Prejudice in introducing original book in stead of certified copy, see APPEAL AND ERROR, § 795 a, b. Conflict of laws as to admissibility of entries in official log book, see CONFLICT OF LAWS, § 166 j. Admissibility of legislative journals, see a. The record kept by the secretary of state, as required by the state Constitution, is competent evidence to contradict official indorsement of bills by the secretary of the senate and the clerk of the house of delegates. Lankford v. Somerset County, 11 L.R.A. 491, 73 Md. 105, 20 Atl. 1017. b. Records of the official acts of the governor, which are kept in a public office, are competent evidence upon the question of the title of a person to an office which he claims under the governor's commission. State ex rel. Worrel v. Peelle, 8 L.R.A. 228, 124 Ind. 515, 24 N. E. 440. c. The report of the drainage commissioners is admissible in evidence in a proceeding to condemn and remove a dam for drainage purposes, where the statute makes such reports prima facie evidence of the facts therein set forth. Zehner v. Milner, 24 L.R.A. (N.S.) 383, 172 Ind. 493, 87 N. E. 209. d. Records of a municipal council disclosing the report of the board of public works concerning the laying out of a sewer and its action thereon are admissible in evidence upon the question of the right to maintain to an agreement with the landowner. Alderman v. New Haven, 18 L.R.A. (N.S.) 74, 81 Conn. 137, 70 Atl. 626. e. The statement of the recorder of a municipal board, in a paper that he was not required to make, that it was done by order of the board, is not evidence of that fact. Tenn. 52, 12 S. W. 422, 426. Lawrence v. Ingersoll, 6 L.R.A. 308, 88 f. The report of a committee of aldermen is admissible to show that the committee did in fact investigate matters not specifically committed to it, in order to show that a witness who is charged with slander in statements made to the committee was making relevant statements. Blakeslee v. Carroll, 25 L.R.A. 106, 64 Conn. 223, 29 Atl. 473. g. Recitals in proceedings of the board of supervisors are not competent evidence that a petition for the establishment of an irrigation district was presented to the board, where the question arises in a direct proceeding to establish the validity of the organization of such district. Re Madera Irrig. Dist. Bonds, 14 L.R.A. 755, 92 Cal. 296, 341, 28 Pac. 272. h. A ruling of the postmaster general ordering a postmaster to deliver to one party mail addressed to another is not admissible on the question of malice in publishing circulars which are injurious to the business of the other party. Shoemaker v. South Bend Spark Arrester Co. 22 L.R.A. 332, 135 Ind. 471, 35 N. E. 280. i. An entry in a record kept by a postmaster as to the payment of a money order is admissible in evidence, although neither the statute nor the requirements of the postoffice department require the record to be kept, where it is necessary and proper in the orderly conduct of the business of the office. State v. Hall, 65 L.R.A. 151, 16 S. D. 6, 91 N. W. 325. § 624. Marriage record. Marriage certificate, see ante, § 619. assistant registrar is admissible in evidence a. A record of marriage attested by an under statutes making such records made registrars in certain places, to whom the by town clerks admissible, providing for statutes relative to clerks shall be applicable, and permitting them to appoint assistants whose attestations shall be of the same 28 L.R.A. 318, 163 Mass. 453, 40 N. E. 846. effect as the registrar's. Com. v. Hayden, (Annotated) $ 625. Land titles. a. The record in the office of the register of deeds, of an attachment of real property, which attachment has been made in conformity with the provisions of Minn. Gen. Stat. 1878, chap. 66, §§ 151, 160, relating to the attachment of real property, is admissible in evidence on the trial of an action involving the title to said property. V. Documentary evidence. b. Various particular documents. Cousins v. Alworth, 10 L.R.A. 504, 44 Minn. | miles from the place where an accident oc505, 47 N. W. 169. b. The original writ, with the sheriff's certificate of an attachment of real property indorsed thereon, is admissible in evidence at the trial of an action involving the title to real property, although the same was not returned and filed with the clerk of the court until long after the entry of judgment. Cousins v. Alworth, 10 L.R.A. 504, 44 Minn. 505, 47 N. W. 169. c. A mistake of the register of deeds in copying the true name of a witness to a deed on the records, instead of the letters "D. S. C.," which constituted the actual signature of the witness, will not annul the probate or destroy the competency of a copy of the record as evidence. Devereux v. McMahon, 12 L.R.A. 205, 108 N. C. 134, 12 S. E. 902. d. The record of a deed is not inad missible in evidence because the letters U. 53 S. E. 978. V. a. Copies of the record of deeds and other similar private writings, made in a sister state, are admissible in evidence in the courts of Minnesota, under the provisions of U. S. Rev. Stat. § 906 (U. S. Comp; Stat. 1901, p. 677), when properly certified and authenticated as required by such act. Wilcox v. Bergman, 5 L.R.A. (N.S.) 938, 96 Minn. 219, 104 N. W. 955. (Annotated) § 627. Tax returns or exemplifications. a. A return of personal property for taxation, compiled by the assessor, is not admissible in evidence on the question of value in an action upon a policy insuring it against loss by fire. Kelley use of Chisholm v. People's Nat. F. Ins. Co. 50 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1164, 262 Ill. 158, 104 N. E. 188. curred by falling upon an icy sidewalk is a. Certified copies of census returns of the Federal government are admissible in evidence upon the question of the age of a citizen deceased since the return was Priddy v. Boice, 9 L.R.A. (N.S.) 718, 201 Mo. 309, 99 S. W. 1055. made. (Annotated) a. That certain papers filed in the case are not contained in a certified copy of a judgment record does not prevent its admission in evidence if the certificate states tute the record, since the missing papers that the writings annexed together constimay not have been a proper part of the record. Wells v. Wells, 35 L.R.A. (N.S.) 561, 209 Mass. 282, 95 N. E. 845. b. A judgment may be used as evidence to prove its own existence. Sweetser v. Fox, 47 L.R.A. (N.S.) 145, 43 Utah, 40, 134 Pac. 599. c. The record of a former suit which was dismissed is not evidence in a subsequent suit between the same parties, for the same Co. L.R.A.1915B, 1179, 123 Minn. 17, 142 Virtue v. Creamery Package Mfg. cause. N. W. 930. d. Where money sued for was paid, pur person against the plaintiff, the judgment is competent evidence against the defendant to prove the fact of the judgment and the sum paid. Smith v. Ayrault, 1 L.R.A. 311, 71 Mich. 475, 39 N. W. 724. b. Where the financial condition of the resident of any county in this state is material to be considered, an exemplificationsuant to a judgment recovered by a third of the tax digest, properly certified by the clerk of the court of ordinary, is admissible in evidence. Churchill v. Jackson, 49 L.R.A. 875, 132 Ga. 666, 64 S. E. 691. § 628. Weather bureau. Opinion evidence by employee of, see post, §§ 865 i, 933 a. a. As tending to show what the weather was on a particular day at a certain place where no records are kept, the United States weather bureau records kept at a place 10 miles distant are admissible. Mears v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. 56 L.R.A. 884, 75 Conn. 171, 52 Atl. 610. b. A record of the United States weather bureau, taken and kept at a station 41 e. In support of exceptions to the report of a trustee in bankruptcy, records in the proceedings are admissible in evidence to show that the trustee petitioned the court to interfere with the sale of certain property alleged to belong to the bankrupt's estate, and, after receiving a bond for the property, and being directed to try out the title, he did nothing, and allowed the bond to be canceled. Re Reinboth, 16 L.R.A. (N.S.) 341, 157 Fed. 672, 85 C. C. A. 340. f. The exemplication of the record of a V. Documentary evidence. b. Various particular documents. habeas corpus proceeding brought by the | attorney to recover money out of which he paternal grandfather of a child of tender years whose parents were dead and who was removed into another county by the maternal grandfather, to obtain the custody of such child, is admissible in evidence in a contest over the guardianship of the child, to be considered by the jury solely in passing upon the question of the domicil of the child. Churchill v. Jackson, 49 L.R.A. (N.S.) 875, 132 Ga. 666, 64 S. E. 691. b. To be evidence against a párty in another suit upon a different cause of action a judgment must be rendered in a proceeding between the same parties or their privies and the point must be involved in both cases and must have been determined upon its merits. Richmond v. Sitterding, 65 L.R.A. 445, 101 Va. 354, 43 S. E. 562. c. A judgment in another action is only evidence of a disputed fact, when recovered in an action between the same parties or their privies; so that although the same fact may have been in issue and determined, in litigation between other parties, the judgment is neither a bar or evidence. Ward v. Boyce, 36 L.R.A. 549, 152 N. Y. 191, 46 N. E. 180. d. A judgment roll in a former suit by the same plaintiff against other defendants is admissible to show that he had elected to treat as a sale acts which he now claims to constitute conversion of property. Terry v. Munger, 8 L.R.A. 216, 121 N. Y. 161, 24 N. E. 272. e. The record of a pending action in which personal property has been taken from defendant under process of the court is admissible in an action by him, in connection with other evidence, to prove the possession and paramount title of such third person. Hodges v. Wilkinson, 17 L.R.A. 545, 111 N. C. 56, 15 S. E. 941. f. The record and judgment in a proceeding to try the right of property levied upon under an execution by an officer, which find the property not to be the property of the debtor, are not admissible in an action brought by the successful claimant against the officer to recover damages for the seizure and detention of the property. Smith v. White, 14 L.R.A. (N.S.) 530, 63 W. Va. 472, 60 S. E. 404. (Annotated) g. The record in an action against an was charged with defrauding plaintiff, which resulted in a judgment against him, is admissible in a proceeding by members of the bar, based on the transaction out of which such action arose, to procure his disbarment for unprofessional conduct,especially where the complaint averred the existence of such record, which the answer denied. Fairfield County Bar ex rel. Fessenden v. Taylor, 13 L.R.A. 767, 60 Conn. 11, 22 Atl. 441. (Annotated) h. The complaint, answer, and decree in a suit by the people to wind up an insolvent bank, are admissible in evidence against the plaintiff in an attachment against such bank, to show that its property has been placed beyond the reach of attachment. Crane v. Pacific Bank, 27 L.R.A. 562, 106 Cal. 64, 39 Pac. 215. i. A judgment annulling foreclosure proceedings in an action brought after a loss by fire, to which an insurer was not a party, is not admissible in evidence against the insurer to defeat a defense against the claim for insurance, which is based on the effect of the foreclosure proceedings to devest the title of the insured before the loss occurred. Tierney v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 36 L.R.A. 760, 4 N. D. 565, 62 N. W. 642. j. In an action against a railroad com pany for damages for breach of covenant in the conduct of water along its right of way, the record of another similar case against it is admissible to show admissions in such case of the company's agents that it was the owner of the road at a certain time, as such admissions must be presumed to have been authorized by the company. Peden v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 4 L.R.A. 401, 78 Iowa, 131, 42 N. W. 625. k. The record of a judgment against a railroad company for personal injuries is admissible as against a purchaser on foreclosure sale, who agreed as part of the price to satisfy all claims held prior in lien, not simply to establish the fact of its rendition, but as proof of when the action was brought, for what, and the amount, for the purpose of showing that such judgment is prior to the mortgage under the South Carolina statute giving judgments for personal injuries, precedence over railroad mortgages. Southern R. Co. v. Bouknight, 30 L.R.A. 823, 70 Fed. 442, 17 C. C. A. 181. 1. In an action for the death of a railroad engineer by the derailment of a train, the record of another suit brought by another plaintiff against the same defendant to recover damages for a similar accident at a different time and place is inadmissible in evidence. Barber v. Louisiana R. & Nav. Co. L.R.A.1917F, 802, 141 La. 869, 76 So. 199. m. The record of an action by an abutting property owner against a street contractor for destruction of his building by a fire started in the street is not admissible in evidence in an action by the property owner to hold the municipal corporation responsible for the loss. Charles Eneu Johnson |