Florida Statute 90.953 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VII
EVIDENCE

Chapter 90
EVIDENCE CODE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 90.953

90.953 Admissibility of duplicates.—A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original, unless:

(1) The document or writing is a negotiable instrument as defined in s. 673.1041, a security as defined in s. 678.1021, or any other writing that evidences a right to the payment of money, is not itself a security agreement or lease, and is of a type that is transferred by delivery in the ordinary course of business with any necessary endorsement or assignment.

(2) A genuine question is raised about the authenticity of the original or any other document or writing.

(3) It is unfair, under the circumstance, to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379; s. 57, ch. 92-82; s. 29, ch. 99-2; s. 142, ch. 2025-92.

F.S. 90.953 on Google Scholar

F.S. 90.953 on CourtListener

Amendments to 90.953

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 90.953

Total Results: 39

Perry v. Fairbanks Capital Corp.

888 So. 2d 725, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 18863, 2004 WL 2827080

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 2004 | Docket: 1697260

Cited 15 times | Published

writing, unless otherwise provided by statute. Section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2002), however, indicates

In Re Amendments to Fla. Evidence Code

782 So. 2d 339, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 909, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 2043, 2000 WL 1587794

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 2000 | Docket: 456391

Cited 14 times | Published

ent privilege); 99-2, section 29 (amending section 90.953, Florida Statutes, Admissibility of duplicates);

In Re Amendments to Fla. Evidence Code

782 So. 2d 339, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 909, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 2043, 2000 WL 1587794

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 2000 | Docket: 456391

Cited 14 times | Published

ent privilege); 99-2, section 29 (amending section 90.953, Florida Statutes, Admissibility of duplicates);

GEG v. State

417 So. 2d 975

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1982 | Docket: 1383986

Cited 13 times | Published

the fifth district court in this case. [3] See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1981). [4] Defense attorneys in

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Clarke

87 So. 3d 58, 2012 WL 1314190, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6036

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 2012 | Docket: 60308017

Cited 11 times | Published

Trial This case turns on the application of section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2010). Popularly known as

Dasma Investments, LLC v. Realty Associates Fund III, L.P.

459 F. Supp. 2d 1294, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94865, 2006 WL 3102818

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 2006 | Docket: 2292884

Cited 7 times | Published

1985) (applying Florida law). See also Fla. Stat. § 90.953 (with respect to negotiable instruments, a copy

State Street Bank and Trust Co. v. Lord

851 So. 2d 790, 2003 WL 21697417

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 2003 | Docket: 1691480

Cited 7 times | Published

satisfactory explanation for its failure to do so. § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2002); W.H. Downing v. First Nat'l

Bryant v. State

810 So. 2d 532, 2002 WL 100414

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 2002 | Docket: 1654794

Cited 7 times | Published

to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (2000). Even though no witness directly

Saporito v. Madras

576 So. 2d 1342, 1991 WL 41025

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 1991 | Docket: 1669720

Cited 7 times | Published

rule allows a duplicate to be admitted under section 90.953(3) unless "[i]t is unfair, under the circumstance

Dyer v. State

26 So. 3d 700, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 914, 2010 WL 366590

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 2010 | Docket: 1468415

Cited 4 times | Published

Although duplicates are acceptable in most cases, see § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (2008), the admissibility of "other

Lowery v. State

402 So. 2d 1287

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1981 | Docket: 1691459

Cited 4 times | Published

admissible in place of the original pursuant to section 90.953, Florida Statutes (1979), which reads in pertinent

Figueredo v. Bank Espirito Santo

537 So. 2d 1113, 1989 WL 6228

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 1989 | Docket: 1179135

Cited 3 times | Published

promissory instrument as is expressly required by section 90.953(1), Florida Statutes (1987). For this reason

Dow Corning Corp. v. Garner

452 So. 2d 1

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 11, 1984 | Docket: 474530

Cited 3 times | Published

documents are equally admissible as originals. § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1981). Only where there is a question

CITIGROUP MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST, ETC v. SHARON SCIALABBA

238 So. 3d 317

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 2018 | Docket: 6326631

Cited 2 times | Published

copy of the complaint met the requirements of Section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2017) (Admissibility of

Brittany's Place Condominium Association, Inc. v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

205 So. 3d 794, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14788

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2016 | Docket: 4469187

Cited 2 times | Published

evidences a right to the payment of money.’ ” (quoting § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2010))). In this regard, a first

Alavi v. Garcia

140 So. 3d 1141, 2014 WL 2808062, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 9348

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 2014 | Docket: 60241379

Cited 2 times | Published

between Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 and section 90.953, Florida Statutes, commonly known as the best

Van Den Borre v. State

596 So. 2d 687, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 548, 1992 WL 12174

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 1992 | Docket: 1358972

Cited 2 times | Published

original will prevent the admission of the duplicate. § 90.953(2), Fla. Stat. (1989). The trial court makes a

Bank of New York Mellon v. Garcia

254 So. 3d 565

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 2018 | Docket: 7361267

Cited 1 times | Published

original was required. Garcia asserted that section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2016), which provides for

JOANNE LIUKKONEN v. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC

243 So. 3d 981

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2018 | Docket: 6348088

Cited 1 times | Published

(first and third alterations in original) (quoting § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2010)). “A promissory note is

Rainess v. Estate of MacHida

81 So. 3d 504, 2012 WL 283089, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1335

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2012 | Docket: 2413470

Cited 1 times | Published

"). In the absence of an original, however, section 90.953(2) allows for the admission of a "duplicate"

H.A. v. State

24 So. 3d 752, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 20393

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 2009 | Docket: 60287279

Cited 1 times | Published

photographs could be properly admitted. We disagree. Section 90.953 provides that duplicates are admissible “to

HA v. State

24 So. 3d 752, 2009 WL 5125101

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 2009 | Docket: 2533306

Cited 1 times | Published

photographs could be properly admitted. We disagree. Section 90.953 provides that duplicates are admissible "to

Pennsylvania Blue Shield v. Wolfe

575 So. 2d 1361, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2101, 1991 WL 31819

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 1991 | Docket: 64657059

Cited 1 times | Published

was admissible *1363instead of the original. See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1989). The authentication requirement

Garcia v. Lopez

483 So. 2d 470, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 422, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6503

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1986 | Docket: 64617465

Cited 1 times | Published

to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1983). A copy of a writing is considered

G. E. G. v. State

417 So. 2d 975, 1982 Fla. LEXIS 2479

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1982 | Docket: 64591599

Cited 1 times | Published

the fifth district court in this case. .See § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1981). . Defense attorneys in the

LINDSAY SANGER v. JUSTIN ASHER AND PRENTICE SANGER A/K/A PRENT SANGER

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2024 | Docket: 68366267

Published

original security agreement was not required. Section 90.953(1), Florida Statutes (2021) states, in pertinent

Williams v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 2024 | Docket: 68149040

Published

January 10, 2024 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (allowing for the use of duplicate

MBC Gospel Network, LLC, Willie Gary, Lorenzo Williams v. Florida's News Channel, LC, Evander Holyfield, Cecil Fielder, and Rick Newberger

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 2019 | Docket: 14973291

Published

omitted). Under the Florida Evidence Code, section 90.953, Florida Statutes, a duplicate document is

LUIS MORALES and CECELIA MORALES v. FIFTH THIRD BANK

238 So. 3d 280

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 2018 | Docket: 6288113

Published

objected, based on the best evidence rule, section 90.953, Florida Statutes. The bank’s counsel advised

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOC., ETC v. JEAN KACHIK

222 So. 3d 592, 93 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 32, 2017 WL 2859241, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 9642

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 2017 | Docket: 6085979

Published

codified, requires the production of the original. § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) (“A duplicate is admissible

Tower Hill Preferred Insurance Co. v. Cabrera

219 So. 3d 862, 2017 WL 2264643, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7532

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 24, 2017 | Docket: 60266952

Published

admissible as a duplicate of the original. See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (2015); Pa. Blue Shield v. Wolfe,

Heller v. Bank of America, N.A.

209 So. 3d 641, 2017 WL 377997, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 859

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 27, 2017 | Docket: 4574691

Published

evidence. Defense counsel objected pursuant to section 90.953, Florida Stat *643 utes (2014)

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Hagstrom

203 So. 3d 918, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 11054

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 20, 2016 | Docket: 4112457

Published

evidences a right to the payment of money.’ ” (quoting § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2010))); see also § 697.02, Fla

Ford v. State

954 So. 2d 672, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 5273, 2007 WL 1062908

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2007 | Docket: 64850285

Published

conclude that the check was admissible under section 90.953, Florida Statutes, and that none of the exceptions

Polanco v. State

710 So. 2d 63, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 3161, 1998 WL 144914

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 1998 | Docket: 64780732

Published

to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1995).

State v. Edgecomb

573 So. 2d 1073, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 953, 1991 WL 15470

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 13, 1991 | Docket: 64656116

Published

necessitates the suppression of evidence). Section 90.953 of the Florida Evidence Code authorizes the

Roberts v. Hart

573 So. 2d 12, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7886, 1990 WL 155069

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 1990 | Docket: 64655860

Published

without producing the original note in that case. § 90.953(1), Fla.Stat. (1989); International Center of

Tillman v. Smith

472 So. 2d 1353, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1824, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14481

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 25, 1985 | Docket: 64613277

Published

duplicate copy is admissible is controlled by section 90.953, Florida Statutes (1983): Admissibility of

Fredericks v. Howell

426 So. 2d 1200, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19030

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 9, 1983 | Docket: 64595137

Published

questioned, or it is unfair to admit the duplicate. § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1981). The word duplicate includes: