§ 1916.Judicial record; impeachment
Title 2. Of the Kinds and Degrees of Evidence · Chapter 3. Writings · Article 2. Public Writings · Enacted 1872 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
Full Text of § 1916
Plain-English Summary
The conclusive or presumptive effect this article gives judicial records is not absolute, and this section supplies the recognized ways to attack a record's reliability. Any judicial record can be impeached by evidence establishing any of three things: that the court or judicial officer lacked jurisdiction, that the parties colluded with each other, or that the party now offering the record committed fraud in connection with the proceedings.
Each ground attacks the record's integrity from a different angle: a jurisdictional defect means the tribunal never had the power to bind anyone, collusion means the parties manufactured the outcome between themselves rather than litigating it in earnest, and fraud by the offering party means that party is trying to use the record to gain an advantage it has not earned.
Frequently Asked Questions
On what grounds can a judicial record be impeached under this section?
Lack of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer, collusion between the parties, or fraud in the proceedings by the party offering the record.
Does a jurisdictional defect always defeat the record's effect?
Evidence of a want of jurisdiction is one of the three recognized grounds for impeaching the record under this section.
What is the effect of showing collusion between the parties to the earlier proceeding?
It is a ground for impeaching the judicial record, since the proceeding was not a genuine adversarial contest.
Amendment History
(Enacted in 1872.)