Riggs v. Tayloe
22 U.S. 483 (1824)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Riggs v. Tayloe, 22 U.S. 483 (1824)

Riggs v. Tayloe

22 U.S. 483

Syllabus

If a party intend to use a written instrument in evidence, he must produce the original, if in his possession. But if it is in the possession of the other party, who refuses to produce it after notice, or if the original is lost or destroyed, secondary evidence (being the best which the nature of the case allows) will be admitted.

The party in such case may read a counterpart, or, if there is no counterpart, an examined copy, or, if no such copy, may give parol evidence of the contents.

Where a writing has been voluntarily destroyed for fraudulent purposes or to create an excuse for its nonproduction, secondary evidence of its contents is not admissible. But where the destruction or loss (although voluntary) happens through mistake or accident, such evidence will be admitted.

Page 22 U. S. 484

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.