BarbriSFCourseDetails
  • videocam On-Demand
  • card_travel Class Action and Other Litigation
  • schedule 90 minutes

Leveraging Federal Rule of Evidence 1006: Using Summaries to Prove the Content of Voluminous Documents

BarbriPdBannerMessage

About the Course

Introduction

This CLE course will guide counsel on correctly using and applying Federal Rule of Evidence 1006 (and state counterparts) to admit summaries, charts, or calculations and prove the content of documents that are too "voluminous" to be conveniently viewed in court. The program will highlight some unusual applications of Rule 1006 and what some may consider abuse.

Description

Summaries of medical bills, work logs, telephone calls, GPS location histories, photographs, bank deposits, withdrawals, etc., are allowed under Rule 1006. The summary is admissible only if the underlying documents are admissible. The proponent must demonstrate that the summary accurately reflects the documents' contents and make the other parties' underlying originals available for examination and copying.

As straightforward as the rule seems, confusion abounds. Some courts have held that Rule 1006 summaries are not evidence; others will not admit summaries unless all underlying documents have been actually admitted; and some courts, if the underlying records have been admitted into evidence, will exclude the summaries. Many courts and litigants incorrectly apply the rules for demonstrative exhibits in Rule 611 to Rule 1006.

Significant problems arise over the requirement that the summaries must accurately and truly reflect the content of the underlying material. Some object that summaries must not contain assumptions, conclusions, and arguments, but others suggest that Rule 1006 does not require objectivity. Occasionally, multiple, conflicting summaries are admitted. Inadmissible reports or hearsay have been known to find their way into evidence via Rule 1006. Counsel opposing the summary must be vigilant and proactive.

Listen as this experienced panel of litigators clarifies the confusion about how Rule 1006 works, jurisdictional differences, creative uses, and best strategies for dealing with summaries.

Presented By

Thomas D. Bever
Partner
Smith Gambrell Russell

Mr. Bever is focused primarily on White Collar criminal defense, representing individual and corporate clients in all stages of criminal investigations in federal and state courts, from the initiation of the investigation through trial. He also represents clients in civil litigation and trials, as well as administrative hearings and regulatory matters. Mr. Bever has served as lead counsel on behalf of companies on a variety of internal investigations. His cases have primarily been in healthcare, government contracting, securities, tax, environmental, and commercial disputes.

Anthony L. Cochran
Partner
Smith Gambrell Russell

Mr. Cochran is a Partner in the Litigation Practice of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP and Co-Leader of the White Collar, Government & Internal Investigations Practice. During the 45 years he has been practicing law in Atlanta, Mr. Cochran has represented many individuals and businesses on a wide variety of complex matters. He has tried dozens of jury trials in many areas of the law (both civil and criminal, federal and state), bench trials (in federal and state courts), administrative and regulatory hearings (before both federal and state agencies and boards), and medical peer review hearings at hospitals. Mr. Cochran's unique experience allows him to handle parallel civil, administrative and criminal proceedings, which are common in today’s legal environment. In 2005, he was inducted into the American College of Trial Lawyers. Mr. Cochran is consistently listed as being one of the “Top 10 Attorneys” in Georgia by Super Lawyers. He is listed in Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition, under Business Litigation. Mr. Cochran is also listed annually in the publication The Best Lawyers in America® (Criminal Law) and in Atlanta Magazine’s compilation of the Best Lawyers in Atlanta (Criminal Law).

John G. McCarthy
Partner
Smith Gambrell Russell

Mr. McCarthy is a Partner in the Litigation Practice in the Firm’s New York office, a member of the Firm’s Intellectual Property Law Group and its Commercial and Bankruptcy Law Practice. He has represented domestic and foreign clients in all aspects of general business litigation in a variety of areas, including business torts, contract disputes, corporate law, and governance, director, and officer liability, intellectual property, unfair competition, trade secrets, professional malpractice, bankruptcy, banking, products liability, and real estate.

Credit Information
  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

Date + Time

  • event

    Thursday, August 26, 2021

  • schedule

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  1. Requirements of Rule 1006
    1. Defining voluminous
    2. Assessing whether originals have been made available to other parties
  2. Rule 1006 summaries are not governed by Rule 611
  3. Admissibility positions
    1. Summaries admissible in lieu of admitting the voluminous material
    2. Summaries admissible only after admitting the voluminous material
    3. Summaries not admissible if voluminous material admitted
  4. Summaries containing assumptions, conclusions and arguments
  5. Testimonial summaries

The panel will review these and other pivotal issues:

  • What is the basis for confusion about Rule 1006?
  • What are practical uses for Rule 1006 summaries?
  • How does counsel object to the use of summaries?
  • Can inadmissible testimony be introduced under the guise of a summary or opinion testimony?
  • What does "in court" mean in the era of remote trials?