RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

Rule 43-I.Record of a Regularly Conducted Activity; Public Record; Photographic Copies

Group VI: Trials · Last amended 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026

In one sentenceRule 43-I creates hearsay exceptions for records of a regularly conducted activity and for public records, and separately allows a properly authenticated photographic or electronic reproduction of a business or government record to be admitted as if it were the original.

Full Text of Rule 43-I

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c)

(a) RECORD OF A REGULARLY CONDUCTED ACTIVITY. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis is not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness, if:
(1) the record was made at or near the time by—or from information transmitted by— someone with knowledge;
(2) the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;
(3) making the record was a regular practice of that activity;
(4) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness or by other means as may be provided by statute; and
(5) the opponent does not show that the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
(b) PUBLIC RECORDS. A record or statement of a public office is not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness, if:
(1) it sets out:
(A) the offices’ activities;
(B) a matter observed while under a legal duty to report, but not including, in a criminal case, a matter observed by law-enforcement personnel; or
(C) in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, factual findings from a legally authorized investigation; and
(2) the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
(c) PHOTOGRAPHIC COPIES.
(1) In General. The reproduction of a record or an enlargement or facsimile of the reproduction, when satisfactorily identified, is as admissible in evidence as the original, whether the original is in existence or not, if any business, institution, member of a profession or calling, or any department or agency of government, in the regular course of business or activity, has:
(A) kept or recorded any memorandum, writing, entry, print, representation or combination thereof of any act, transaction, occurrence or event; and
(B) caused any or all of the same to be recorded, copied or reproduced by any photographic, photostatic, microfilm, microcard, miniature photographic, or other process, which appears to accurately reproduce or form a durable medium for reproducing the original,
(2) Admission of Original. The introduction of a reproduced record, enlargement, or facsimile does not preclude admission of the original.

Comment

Stylistic changes were made to this rule to conform with the 2007 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The rule was also amended to make it more consistent with federal practice. Section (a) adopts language from Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6), except that the reference to “a certification that complies with [Federal Rule of Evidence] 902(11) or (12)” was replaced with “by other means as may be provided by statute.” While the majority of states permit authentication of domestic or foreign business records by a certification under 902(11) or (12), this jurisdiction does not currently permit it.

Section (b) adopts language from Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8). Section (c) maintains the Superior Court practice of permitting photographic copies.

Plain-English Summary

Rule 43-I(a) lets a business record into evidence over a hearsay objection when it meets five conditions: someone with knowledge made or supplied the information for the record at or near the time of the event, keeping that kind of record was a regular part of the activity's operation, making the record was a regular practice, a custodian or other qualified witness (or another method allowed by statute) establishes all of that, and the opponent cannot show the source of the information or the way the record was prepared makes it untrustworthy. The exception covers records of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis kept by a business, organization, or calling, whether or not it operates for profit, and it applies whether or not the person who made the record is available to testify.

Rule 43-I(b) creates a parallel exception for public records — records or statements from a public office describing that office's own activities, describing a matter observed under a legal duty to report, or setting out factual findings from a legally authorized investigation in a civil case. As with business records, the opponent can defeat the exception by showing the source of information or other circumstances make the record untrustworthy.

Rule 43-I(c) addresses a different problem: proving a record exists when only a copy survives. It allows a reproduction, enlargement, or facsimile of a business or government record to come into evidence just as the original would, so long as it is satisfactorily identified and was made and kept in the regular course of business using a process that accurately reproduces the original — whether the original photographic or electronic process was microfilm, microcard, or another comparable method. Introducing the reproduced version does not stop a party from also offering the original if it still exists.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a business record come into evidence even if the person who wrote it can't testify?

Yes. Rule 43-I(a) allows a qualifying record of a regularly conducted activity into evidence regardless of whether the person who made it is available as a witness, so long as the five conditions in the rule are met and the opponent cannot show the record is untrustworthy.

What has to be shown for a business record to qualify under this exception?

Rule 43-I(a) requires that someone with knowledge made or supplied the record at or near the time of the event, that keeping such records was a regular part of the activity, that making the record was a regular practice, and that a custodian or other qualified witness (or another statutory method) establishes those facts.

Does a public agency's investigation report count as an exception to hearsay?

Rule 43-I(b) allows factual findings from a legally authorized investigation into evidence in a civil case, along with records of a public office's own activities and matters observed under a legal duty to report, unless the opponent shows the record is untrustworthy.

Can I use a photocopy or scanned image of a business record instead of the original?

Rule 43-I(c) allows a satisfactorily identified reproduction, enlargement, or facsimile of a record to be admitted just as the original would be, if the business or government office made and kept it in the regular course of activity using a process that accurately reproduces the original.

If I introduce a reproduced copy of a record, can the other side still demand the original?

Introducing a reproduction does not preclude admission of the original under Rule 43-I(c)(2) — the two are not mutually exclusive, and the original can still be offered if it exists.

Source & verification. Rule text and official Comments are reproduced verbatim from the District of Columbia Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Last verified July 14, 2026. · Official source
Also known as: business records hearsay exception dcpublic records exception dc superior courtphotographic copy of record admissible dccustodian of records testimony dc ruleregularly conducted activity records exception