green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.1 score
“the primary emphasis of rule 803(6) is on the reliability and trustworthiness of the records sought to be introduced, and the trial judge exercises broad discretion in determining the inadmissibility.”
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 17 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
William Belber v. Charles S. Lipson, M.D., D/B/A Metromedic Walk in Medical Center, Appeal of W. Robert Felix, Jr., M.D.
the primary emphasis of rule 803(6) is on the reliability and trustworthiness of the records sought to be introduced, and the trial judge exercises broad discretion in determining the inadmissibility.
discussed
Cited "see"
Beale v. Kurtz (In Re Beale)
See Mississippi River Grain Elevator, Inc. v. Bartlett & Co., Grain, 659 F.2d 1314, 1319 (5th Cir.1981) (quoting United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1191-92 (5th Cir.1979), cert denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Perry Moss, Jr., and Rosalind E. Moss v. Ole South Real Estate, Inc., Perry Moss, Jr., and Rosalind E. Moss v. Ole South Real Estate, Inc.
See United States v. Duncan, 919 F.2d 981, 986 (5th Cir.1990) (“ ‘the primary emphasis of rule 803(6) is on the reliability or trustworthiness of the records sought to be introduced’ ”) (quoting United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1189 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980)); Herdman v. Smith, 707 F.2d 839, 842 (5th Cir.1983) (equating trustworthiness with reliability). 6 We have held that *1308 reliability focuses on the methodology behind the report.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jeff Edward Fortenberry, Jr.
See United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1192 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Meaders v. United States
(2×)
The requisite foundation for admission of the document, however, “must be laid through the testimony of someone who is sufficiently familiar with the practices of the business involved to testify that the records were made in the regular course of business, and thus to verify their authenticity.” United States v. Leal, 509 F.2d 122, 127 (9th Cir.1975) (citations omitted); accord, e.g., United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1191-1192 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980); United States v. Jones, 554 F.2d 251, 252 (5th Cir.), cert. denied…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Charles David Parker A/K/A Ramp Parker
See United States v. VeytiaBravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1191-92 (5th Cir.1979), ce rt. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980); United States v. Flora, 558 F.2d 1179, 1182 (5th Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Messimer
See United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310, 314 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
George Koropoulos v. The Credit Bureau, Inc
See United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1188 (5th Cir.1979) (records required by law are admissible as routine business records under Fed.R.Evid. 803(6)), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Itel Capital Corporation, a Corporation, Cross-Appellant v. Cups Coal Company, Incorporated, a Corporation and Herman Mulvehill, Cross-Appellees
See United States v. Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1191-92 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 *1260 U.S. 1024, 100 S.Ct. 686 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980); United States v. Flom, 558 F.2d 1179, 1182 (5th Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Ellender v. Schweiker
See Swift v. Toia, 450 F.Supp. 983 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff’d, Swift v. Blum, 598 F.2d 312 (2nd Cir.1979), cert. den., Blum v. Swift, 444 U.S. 1025 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert D. Blair v. United States of America, Charles L. Moore v. United States of America, William G. Dodds, Jr. v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310, 315 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980). [n]o limitation shall be placed on the information concerning the background, character, and conduct of a person convicted of an offense which a court of the United States may receive and consider for the purpose of imposing an appropriate sentence.
cited
Cited "see"
Swift Ex Rel. Swift v. Blum
See Swift v. Toia, 461 F.Supp. 578 (S.D.N.Y. 1978), aff’d per curiam sub nom., Swift v. Blum, 598 F.2d 312 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1025 , 100 S.Ct. 1025 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Patrick Addis v. Gerald Whitburn, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services
Id. at 1224 (citation omitted); see also Swift v. Toia, 461 F.Supp. 578, 581-82 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff 'd. & adopted, 598 F.2d 312 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1025 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lucas
See also United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Barker
Indeed, perhaps paramount among the purposes of punishment is the desire to deter similar misconduct by others. 10 This doctrine, commonly called “general deterrence,” 11 boasts an impressive lineage, 12 was long-recognized at common law, 13 and continues to command “near unanimity ... among state and federal jurists____” United States v. Bergman, 416 F.Supp. 496, 499 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (Frankel, J.); see also United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310, 315 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980); United States v. Elliott, 674 F.2d 754, 756 (8th Cir.19…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Robert Wayne Barker, United States of America v. William Bernard McKinney United States of America v. Jeffrey Martin Engle, United States of America v. George Leland Timmons, Iii, United States of America v. Jason Engle
Indeed, perhaps paramount among the purposes of punishment is the desire to deter similar misconduct by others. 10 This doctrine, commonly called "general deterrence," 11 boasts an impressive lineage, 12 was long-recognized at common law, 13 and continues to command "near unanimity ... among state and federal jurists...." United States v. Bergman, 416 F.Supp. 496, 499 (S.D.N.Y.1976) (Frankel, J.); see also United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310, 315 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980); United States v. Elliott, 674 F.2d 754, 756 (8th Cir.1982); Uni…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Judy Marietta Castello
See also United States v. Moore, 599 F.2d 310, 314 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1024 , 100 S.Ct. 687 , 62 L.Ed.2d 658 (1980) (declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Palacios
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 79-5729.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 7, 1980.
444 U.S. 1024
Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.