Rule 106

Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements

When a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.

div4_red.gif (1271 bytes)

Note (Federal Judicial Center)

The rule enacted by the Congress is the rule prescribed by the Supreme Court as Rule 107 without change.

div4_red.gif (1271 bytes)


Gender-neutralizing amendments were made to this rule in 1987.

div4_red.gif (1271 bytes)

Advisory Committee’s Note

The rule is an expression of the rule of completeness. McCormick 56. It is manifested as to depositions in Rule 32(a)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of which the proposed rule is substantially a restatement.

The rule is based on two considerations. The first is the misleading impression created by taking matters out of context. The second is the inadequacy of repair work when delayed to a point later in the trial. See McCormick 56; California Evidence Code 356. The rule does not in any way circumscribe the right of the adversary to develop the matter on cross-examination or as part of his own case.

For practical reasons, the rule is limited to writings and recorded statements and does not apply to conversations.

div1.gif (1531 bytes)
Home | Contents | Topical Index | Syllabi | Search | Contact Us | Professors' Pages
Cases | Problems | Rules | Statutes | Articles | Commentary