Opinion ID: 588253
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: admission of bank audit document

Text: The standard of review for challenges to evidentiary foundations is abuse of discretion. United States v. Arboleda, 929 F.2d 858, 869 (1st Cir. 1991). A proper foundation exists when a witness testifies that the records were (1) made or based on information transmitted by a person with knowledge at or near the time of the transaction; (2) made in the ordinary course of business; and (3) trustworthy. United States v. Moore, 923 F.2d 910, 914-915 (1st Cir. 1991). The court admitted an internal audit report as a business record pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 803(6). The Director of Internal Audit for FSB, Peter Hebert, testified that he himself prepared the report in the ordinary course of business of the bank. Therefore, the admission of such evidence was not an abuse of the district court's discretion. United States v. McGill, 953 F.2d 10, 14 (1st Cir. 1992) (testimony of supervisor of bank's coupon department during time in question laid solid foundation and established trustworthiness); Kassel v. Gannett Co., Inc., 875 F.2d 935, 945 (1st Cir. 1989) (entries prepared as regular part of business admissible pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)).