Opinion ID: 2217846
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Admissibility of Books and Records upon Which Offered Inventory Computations Were Made.

Text: Defendant contends that even if plaintiff's inventory computations were not excludable under sec. 2 (b) of the policy quoted above, they would be excludable on the ground that such computations were based upon books and records which were themselves inadmissible. Tabulations or summarized statements made by a competent person, and identified by his testimony, are admissible in evidence. The reason in such a situation for permitting use of a tabulation or summarized statement is to avoid the inconvenience of introducing an entire mass of records which would have to be read to, or inspected by, a jury. Nevertheless, before such tabulations or summarized statements are admitted, the books and records upon which they are based must be in evidence, or in court, or available to the opposite party. Gregg v. Middle States Co. (1940), 228 Iowa 933, 944, 945, 293 N. W. 66, 132 A. L. R. 415; 4 Wigmore, Evidence (3d ed.), p. 434, sec. 1230; and 20 Am. Jur., Evidence, p. 400, sec. 449. Among the Wisconsin cases in which the admission of such tabulations or summarized statements has been upheld are Graton & Knight Co. v. Mayville Shoe Corp. (1945), 247 Wis. 11, 18 N. W. (2d) 359, Ruth v. State (1909), 140 Wis. 373, 122 N. W. 733, and Jordan v. Estate of Warner (1900), 107 Wis. 539, 83 N. W. 946. The question arises as to whether the books and records, which must be produced or made available to the opposite party, must themselves be admissible in evidence before tabulations or summarized statements based thereon are admissible. In the Graton & Knight Co. Case this court held that such books and records did not have to be admissible into evidence. Nevertheless, we deem that holding applicable to a situation, as in that case, where the person who prepares the tabulation or summarized statement has personal knowledge of the facts recorded in the books and records from which the tabulation or summarized statement is prepared. Thus such books and records merely serve to refresh the recollection of the witness. Cf. Anno. Refreshment of recollection by use of memoranda or other writings, 82 A. L. R. (2d) 473, and the reference to the Graton & Knight Co. Case, at page 538. See also Dahl v. H. C. Crook Realty Co. (1932), 208 Wis. 506, 511, 243 N. W. 426. In the situation presented in the instant case, where the tabulation or summarized statement of the books and records has been prepared by one who has no personal knowledge of the facts recorded in such books and records, the competency of the tabulation or summarized statement must derive from the books and records on which it is based; thus such books and records must themselves be admissible into evidence. Therefore, we hold that where the tabulation or summarized statement is prepared by one whose memory as to the actual recorded facts would not be refreshed by referring to the books and records upon which the tabulation or summarized statement is based, such books and records must themselves be admissible in evidence. In the instant case the permanent records of plaintiff, consisting of its original journals and general ledger, were offered in evidence and received as Exhibit 4. Nevertheless, defendant contends that these books and records were not admissible under either secs. 327.24 or 327.25, Stats. As originally enacted sec. 327.24 pertained to the books and records of a party and sec. 327.25 related to those of a third person not a party to the action. Skogstad and Koppa, Admissibility of Business Entries, 1958 Wisconsin Law Review, 245, 247. In 1939, sec. 327.25 was broadened by an amendment to include business entries of a party as well as those of some third person. Ibid. Nevertheless, since we are satisfied the books and records constituting Exhibit 4 were admissible under sec. 327.24, [1] we find it unnecessary to consider their admissibility under sec. 327.25. These books and records were identified by the testimony of Salen, plaintiff's president and treasurer, as follows: They were plaintiff's account books kept in the usual course of business under Salen's supervision and direction. The entries therein were made contemporaneously with the transactions to which they related and were in the handwriting of persons authorized to make them. These books of account were true and correct to his knowledge. One of the accounts kept in these books was an account of parts and accessories. The posting into the account was made from the invoices of parts and accessories purchased, and from the hard copies of the sales slips covering sale of parts and accessories, including those used in filling repair orders. All purchases and sales of parts and accessories for the period from August, 1954, through December, 1960, are reflected in these books. Defendant contends that the purchase invoices and hard copies of the sales slips are the original entries for purchases and sales of parts and accessories within the meaning of sec. 327.24, Stats. Therefore, defendant argues, the trial court erred in admitting plaintiff's books of account without requiring the production of all purchase invoices and sales slips from which postings were made into such books of account. We deem defendant's contention erroneous in view of our conclusion that the journal entries made from such purchase invoices and sales slips are the original entries within the meaning of sec. 327.24. McCormick, Evidence (hornbook series), p. 600, sec. 284, states: The entries to be admissible must be `original' entries, and not mere transcribed records or copies. This restriction is based upon the assumption that the original entries are likely to be more accurate than subsequent copies or transcriptions. In many businesses, however, it is customary for the daily transactions such as sales, or services, to be noted upon slips, memorandum books, or the like, by the employee concerned, such as a salesman, clerk, foreman, weigher, or workman, and thereafter these slips or memoranda are regularly and promptly collected and entries made therefrom in a permanent book such as a journal or ledger. In such event, the entries in the permanent book sufficiently comply with the requirement that the entries be `original,' and would certainly be admissible if the slips or memoranda have disappeared,and would seem, since they are held to be original entries, to be independently admissible without any proof as to the unavailability of the first tentative memoranda. See also Anno. What constitutes books of original entry within rule as to admissibility of books of account, 17 A. L. R. (2d) 235, 246. In Taylor v. Davis (1892), 82 Wis. 455, 52 N. W. 756, an agent for plaintiff noted daily on a piece of paper the amount of logs that were scaled. The agent turned these pieces of paper over to plaintiff's bookkeeper who posted into a shipping book the amount of logs scaled as shown on such pieces of paper. The pieces of paper were then destroyed. The court held that the shipping book was a book of original entry which was properly admitted into evidence after the necessary foundation had been laid by testimony of plaintiff's bookkeeper. Therefore, the journals and general ledger constituting Exhibit 4 were properly ruled admissible by the trial court under sec. 327.24, Stats.