Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.
286 F.2d 388 (1961)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), a newspaper article that is otherwise inadmissible hearsay may be admitted into evidence if it is necessary and possesses a circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness.
Facts:
- In 1901, while the Dallas County Courthouse was under construction in Selma, Alabama, a fire occurred in its unfinished dome.
- An unsigned article in the June 9, 1901, edition of the 'Morning Times of Selma' described this fire.
- On July 7, 1957, the clock tower of the Dallas County Courthouse collapsed.
- An examination of the collapsed tower's debris revealed the presence of charcoal and charred timbers.
- Dallas County claimed the collapse was caused by a lightning strike that occurred five days prior.
- The County's insurers denied the claim, asserting the collapse was due to pre-existing structural weaknesses.
- The insurers contended the char found in the debris was evidence of a much older fire, not a recent lightning strike.
Procedural Posture:
- Dallas County filed lawsuits against its insurers in the Circuit Court of Dallas County, Alabama, a state trial court.
- The insurers removed seven of the suits to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, a federal trial court, where they were consolidated.
- At trial, the insurers offered a 1901 newspaper article into evidence to prove a fire had occurred.
- Dallas County objected, arguing the article was inadmissible hearsay.
- The district court judge overruled the objection and admitted the newspaper into evidence.
- The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant insurers.
- Dallas County, as appellant, appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, challenging only the admission of the newspaper article.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a 58-year-old newspaper article, which is hearsay, admissible in a federal court under Rule 43(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to prove that a historical event occurred, when it is deemed necessary due to a lack of other evidence and trustworthy due to the circumstances of its publication?
Opinions:
Majority - Wisdom, Circuit Judge
Yes, a 58-year-old newspaper article that is hearsay is admissible under these circumstances. Admissibility of evidence in a federal diversity case is a procedural matter governed by the liberal standards of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), which favors the reception of relevant evidence. While the newspaper article does not fit into a recognized hearsay exception like 'business records' or 'ancient documents,' the court can create an exception based on principle. Following the framework laid out by Judge Learned Hand in G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Syndicate Pub. Co., an exception to the hearsay rule is justified where there is 1) necessity and 2) a circumstantial guaranty of trustworthiness. Here, necessity is established because the fire occurred 58 years ago, making it improbable that any reliable eyewitness testimony could be found. Trustworthiness is established because a false report of a fire at a public building in a small town would have been immediately exposed and subjected the newspaper to embarrassment, meaning there was no motive to falsify the report. The contemporary newspaper account is therefore more reliable than the memory of any witness testifying decades later.
Analysis:
This decision represents a significant, pragmatic departure from the rigid application of the hearsay rule, championing the liberal and flexible spirit of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It establishes that federal courts have the authority to craft new, common-law exceptions to hearsay when evidence is both highly probative and reliable. The case's two-part 'necessity and trustworthiness' framework became a foundational principle that later influenced the drafting of the Federal Rules of Evidence, particularly the residual exception (now FRE 807), which allows for the admission of hearsay that does not fit a traditional exception but has equivalent guarantees of trustworthiness.
Unlock the full brief for Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.