Rule 44.Proof of official record; Foreign law
Group VI: Trials · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 13, 2026
Full Text of Rule 44
Notes
Note: This Rule 44 is substantially the Federal Rule. It conforms to present practice and Code §§ 19-5-10, 19-5- 20, 19-5-40 and 19-5-220. Rule 44(d) is new. It conforms to present practice but is a more precise statement.
Note to 1986 Amendment: This amendment [to Rule 44(d)] permits the issue of foreign law to be raised by any written notice rather than only in the pleadings or a motion. It is similar to Federal Rule 44.1 and supplements the Uniform Judicial Notice of Foreign Law Act, S.C. Code § 19-3-110 et seq.
Plain-English Summary
Proving that a document is what it claims to be — an official record from a government office — usually calls for more than handing a copy to the clerk. Rule 44(a)(1) lets a party prove a domestic official record either through an official publication of it or through a copy attested by the officer who has legal custody, accompanied by a certificate confirming that custody. Depending on where the record sits, that certificate can come from a judge of a court of record, a public officer with an official seal, or, for records kept abroad, a consular or diplomatic officer of the United States. Foreign official records follow a parallel path under Rule 44(a)(2): an official publication, or an attested copy paired with a final certification of the signature and position of whoever attested it. If all parties have had a fair chance to check the documents, the court can excuse the final certification or accept an attested summary instead, for good cause.
Rule 44(b) covers the opposite situation — proving that no record exists. A written statement that a diligent search turned up no matching record, authenticated the same way as a record itself would be, counts as evidence that the records contain nothing responsive. Rule 44(c) makes clear this rule does not foreclose proving official records, or the absence of one, by any other method the law already allows.
Rule 44(d) addresses a different problem: what happens when the law of another jurisdiction matters to the case. A party who intends to raise an issue about foreign law must give notice, either in the pleadings or through other reasonable written notice or a motion. Once raised, the court can look at any relevant material or source — including testimony — whether or not a party submitted it or it would otherwise be admissible under the rules of evidence. The court's ruling on foreign law is treated as a ruling on a question of law, not a question of fact for the jury.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I prove a certified copy of an official record from another state?
Rule 44(a)(1) lets you use an official publication of the record or a copy attested by the custodian, paired with a certificate of that custody. If the record is kept within the United States, the certificate can come from a judge of a court of record or a public officer with an official seal.
What if the record I need is kept in a foreign country?
Rule 44(a)(2) requires an official publication or an attested copy along with a final certification of the genuineness of the attesting person's signature and position, typically from a U.S. consular officer or a diplomatic official of the foreign country. The court can waive the final certification for good cause if everyone has had a fair chance to check the document's authenticity.
How do I prove that a record does NOT exist in an office's files?
Rule 44(b) allows a written statement, authenticated the same way as the record would be, saying that a diligent search found no matching record — that statement itself is admissible to show the records contain nothing on point.
Do I have to raise a foreign-law issue in my pleadings?
Not necessarily in the pleadings themselves — Rule 44(d) allows notice through the pleadings, other reasonable written notice, or an applicable motion, as long as notice is given.
Can a judge consider evidence about foreign law that a party never formally submitted?
Yes. Rule 44(d) lets the court consider any relevant material or source on foreign law, including testimony, whether or not a party submitted it and whether or not it would be admissible under ordinary evidence rules.