Toni filed an action for breach of contract against Ivana. At the trial, Toni answered these questions from her counsel: Q: What happened next, if any? A: Ivana and I negotiated the terms of the transaction. Q: After your negotiation with Ivana, did you reduce your agreement into writing? A: Yes, we drafted and signed an instrument. Q: Do you know the contents of this instrument? A: Yes. Q: Will you tell the court the contents of this instrument? If you are Ivana’s counsel, will you object to the last question? Explain.
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
Yes, as Ivana's counsel, I will object to the question.
Under Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence is admissible other than the original document itself. Oral testimony regarding a document's contents constitutes secondary evidence, which is inadmissible unless the original's loss or unavailability is proven and the proper foundation is laid.
Here, the question asks Toni to state the contents of the written agreement. Because the contract's contents are the subject of inquiry, the original document must be produced. Eliciting oral testimony to prove its contents without accounting for the non-production of the original violates the Original Document Rule.
Therefore, I will object to the question for violating the Original Document Rule.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Will Ivana's counsel succeed in objecting to the question asking Toni to state the contents of the written agreement?
The Original Document Rule prohibits oral testimony to prove a document's contents when the original is available.
Under Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, what is required when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document?
Section 3, Rule 130 mandates that no evidence is admissible other than the original document itself when its contents are in issue.
When may secondary evidence of a document's contents be validly admitted in court?
Secondary evidence is admissible only after establishing the original's execution, existence, and loss or destruction without bad faith.
Under Rule 132, Section 36, when must an objection to an objectionable question be made?
Objections to oral evidence must be made as soon as the ground becomes apparent, typically right after the question is asked.
What is the legal effect of failing to object to oral testimony that violates the Original Document Rule?
Failure to object to secondary evidence constitutes a waiver of the Original Document Rule, allowing the court to admit and consider the testimony.
Learn more about these topics
1. Original Document Rule
Under Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence is admissible other than the original document itself. This rule ensures that the exact terms of a written contract are proved by the document itself rather than unreliable human memory. Oral testimony offered to prove the terms or provisions of a written agreement constitutes secondary evidence, which is inadmissible unless the original document is properly accounted for under statutory exceptions.
2. Secondary Evidence
Secondary evidence regarding the contents of a document becomes admissible only after the party offering it establishes the execution and existence of the original document, its loss or destruction, or its unavailability without bad faith on the offeror's part. Under Rule 130, Section 5, establishing a proper foundation requires showing that reasonable diligence was exercised to locate the missing original. Without laying this mandatory evidentiary foundation, any attempt to elicit oral testimony to prove a written instrument's contents violates the Original Document Rule.
3. Timely Objections
In trial practice, an objection to oral testimony attempting to prove the contents of a written document must be raised immediately when the objectionable question is asked. Under Rule 132, Section 36, objections to evidence must be made as soon as the ground becomes reasonably apparent. Failing to object to parol or secondary evidence when offered allows the testimony to be admitted and evaluated by the court, effectively waiving the protection afforded by the Original Document Rule.