Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from \Automatic\" Sprinkler Corp. of America v. Coley & Petersen.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | \Automatic\" Sprinkler Corp. of America v. Coley & Petersen Anchor | green | “admission of such evidence is conditioned, therefore, on proof that the document comes from the proper custodian and that it is a record kept in the ordinary course of business made contemporaneously with the event by persons having the duty to keep a true record.” | 4 |
| 2 | Sparks v. Commonwealth | green | “into evidence of verified regular business entries without requiring proof from the original observers or record keepers.” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.