Cases from cite.case.law:

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, v. GARCIA,, 254 So. 3d 565 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Garcia asserted that section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2016), which provides for admission of duplicates . . . Section 90.953 provides: Admissibility of duplicates A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as . . . modification agreement was inadmissible because it is a negotiable instrument and that, under section 90.953 . . . modification agreement is not a negotiable instrument; therefore, the Bank was entitled under section 90.953 . . . agreement was a negotiable instrument and that a duplicate was inadmissible under sections 90.952 and 90.953 . . .

LIUKKONEN, v. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC,, 243 So. 3d 981 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Id. at 60 (first and third alterations in original) (quoting § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2010) ). . . . Appellant did not timely challenge their authenticity or the fairness of using copies, § 90.953(2) - . . . same degree as an original, as it is not a negotiable instrument as defined in section 673.1041. § 90.953 . . .

CITIGROUP MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST INC. v. SCIALABBA, 238 So. 3d 317 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . modification agreement attached to a certified copy of the complaint met the requirements of Section 90.953 . . .

H. MORALES v. FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY,, 238 So. 3d 280 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . of the promissory note into evidence, appellants objected, based on the best evidence rule, section 90.953 . . . the trial court improperly admitted a copy of the note over the borrower's objection under section 90.953 . . . A duplicate may be admitted "to the same extent as an original" unless certain exceptions apply. § 90.953 . . . the bank offered a copy of the note at trial, to which defense counsel objected pursuant to section 90.953 . . . Because the trial court improperly admitted the copy of the note over objection in violation of section 90.953 . . .

U. S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, FOR HOME EQUITY ASSET TRUST HOME EQUITY PASS- THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES v. KACHIK N. A. N. A. s In, 222 So. 3d 592 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . § 90.953(1), Fla. . . .

TOWER HILL PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CABRERA,, 219 So. 3d 862 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (2015); Pa. Blue Shield v. Wolfe, 575 So.2d 1361, 1363 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). . . .

D. HELLER a k a v. BANK OF AMERICA, NA, BAC LP f k a LP,, 209 So. 3d 641 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Defense counsel objected pursuant to section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2014), commonly known as the best . . . failed to introduce sufficient evidence that it possessed the original note, in violation of section 90.953 . . . Section 90.953 allows for the admission of a duplicate “to the same extent as an original” unless certain . . . The exception relevant here is when the document is a negotiable instrument, See § 90.953(1). . . . Fla. 2d DCA 2013), and thus the evidence code requires that the original be produced at trial, see § 90.953 . . .

BRITTANY S PLACE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. U. S. BANK, N. A., 205 So. 3d 794 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . ,’ a ‘security,’ ‘or anyother writing that evidences a right to the payment of money.’ ” (quoting § 90.953 . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, v. L. HAGSTROM R., 203 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . ’ a ‘security,’ ‘or any other writing that evidences a right to the payment of money.’ ” (quoting § 90.953 . . .

ALAVI v. A. GARCIA,, 140 So. 3d 1141 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . This case involves the interplay between Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 and section 90.953, Florida . . . is admissible to the same extent as an original, unless the document is a negotiable instrument. § 90.953 . . .

T. D. W. a v. STATE, 137 So. 3d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . originals: The original of a writing, recording, or photograph is not required, except as provided in s. 90.953 . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, v. CLARKE a k a C. M., 87 So. 3d 58 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Popularly known as the best evidence rule, section 90.953 states the general rule that “[a] duplicate . . . The exception that is relevant here is contained in section 90.953(1), which states, inter alia, that . . . Under section 90.953(1), A — the transferor — is not able to sue on the photocopy copy of the promissory . . . The reasoning in Perry, hewing closely to the language of section 90.953, is persuasive. . . . The policies underlying the requirement for the original note in section 90.953(1) have been satisfied . . .

RAINESS, v. In ESTATE OF MACHIDA,, 81 So. 3d 504 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . In the absence of an original, however, section 90.953(2) allows for the admission of a “duplicate” “ . . . Thus, if a duplicate is properly admitted under section 90.953, it also precludes consideration of secondary . . . We note, however, that while Rainess’ document was not admissible under section 90.953, it was clearly . . . Lopez, 483 So.2d 470, 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“Section 90.954 is broader than section 90.953-a copy which . . . is not admissible under section 90.953 as a duplicate may still be admissible under section 90.954.” . . .

DYER, v. STATE, 26 So. 3d 700 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Although duplicates are acceptable in most cases, see § 90.953, Fla. . . . provides: The original of a writing, recording, or photograph is not required, except as provided in s. 90.953 . . .

H. A. a v. STATE, 24 So. 3d 752 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Because we conclude that the photographs were properly admitted as duplicates pursuant to sections 90.953 . . . Section 90.953 provides that duplicates are admissible “to the same extent as an original” unless a genuine . . .

FORD, v. STATE, 954 So. 2d 672 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

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

DASMA INVESTMENTS, LLC, a v. REALTY ASSOCIATES FUND III, L. P. a, 459 F. Supp. 2d 1294 (S.D. Fla. 2006)

. . . . § 90.953 (with respect to negotiable instruments, a copy or duplicate is not admissible to the same . . .

T. PERRY J. v. FAIRBANKS CAPITAL CORP., 888 So. 2d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 90.953, Florida Statutes (2002), however, indicates that duplicates are admissible unless a genuine . . .

STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, v. LORD,, 851 So. 2d 790 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . . § 90.953(1), Fla. Stat. (2002); W.H. Downing v. . . .

RUSSELL, v. STATE, 844 So. 2d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . —The original of a writing, recording, or photograph is not required, except as provided in s. 90.953 . . .

McKEEHAN, v. STATE, 838 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . that: The original of a writing, recording, or photograph is not required, except as provided in s. 90.953 . . . See §§ 90.953, .955, .956, .957, Fla. Stat. (2002). . § 90.404(2)(a), Fla. . . .

BRYANT, v. STATE, 810 So. 2d 532 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . . § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA EVIDENCE CODE, 782 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2000)

. . . section 90.503, Florida Statutes, Psychotherapist-patient privilege); 99-2, section 29 (amending section 90.953 . . .

POLANCO, v. STATE, 710 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . . § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

PLEMONDON, v. FERNANDEZ, M. D. M. D. P. A. M. D. D. C., 699 So. 2d 755 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . I believe sections 90.953 and 90.954, Florida Statutes (1995) would allow for its admission, to allow . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. J. RESNICK,, 636 So. 2d 75 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . We find that because the appellee/cross appellant has not substantiated any claim, under Sections 90.953 . . .

VAZ, v. STATE, 599 So. 2d 250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . .-952, 90.953, and 90.954, Fla.Stat. (1991). The conviction is therefore affirmed. . . .

A. VAN DEN BORRE, v. STATE, 596 So. 2d 687 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . . § 90.953(2), Fla.Stat. ”(1989). . . .

A. HUTCHINSON, v. STATE, 580 So. 2d 257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . .-952, 90.953, and 90.954, Florida Statutes (1989). . . .

SAPORITO, v. A. MADRAS,, 576 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . The best evidence rule allows a duplicate to be admitted under section 90.953(3) unless “[i]t is unfair . . . In both instances Saporito was not permitted to make a proper showing under sections 90.953 and 90.954 . . .

PENNSYLVANIA BLUE SHIELD, v. S. WOLFE,, 575 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . See § 90.953, Fla. Stat. (1989). . . . The insurer’s objection based on subsection 90.953(1), Florida Statutes, is misplaced. . . . See § 90.953, West’s Fla.Stat.Annot. (1979) (Sponsor’s Note); C. . . . See § 90.953, West’s Fla.Stat.Annot. (1979) (Sponsor’s Note) (“This section recognizes that when the . . .

STATE v. EDGECOMB,, 573 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Section 90.953 of the Florida Evidence Code authorizes the admission of a duplicate to the same extent . . . § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

ROBERTS, v. HART, 573 So. 2d 12 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . . § 90.953(1), Fla.Stat. (1989); International Center of the Americas, Inc. v. . . .

O. FIGUEREDO L. v. BANK ESPIRITO SANTO,, 537 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . evidence the original copy of a negotiable promissory instrument as is expressly required by section 90.953 . . .

GARCIA, v. LOPEZ,, 483 So. 2d 470 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . . § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1983). . . . duplicate” within the meaning of section 90.951(4)(a), and, therefore, cannot be admitted under section 90.953 . . . Section 90.954 is broader than section 90.953 —a copy which is not admissible under section 90.953 as . . .

C. TILLMAN, L. v. SMITH,, 472 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Whether a duplicate copy is admissible is controlled by section 90.953, Florida Statutes (1983): Admissibility . . . was a document involving payment of money and therefore a copy of it was inadmissible under section 90.953 . . . makes a xerox copy of a promissory note and subsequently negotiates the original to B, under section 90.953 . . . To fall under section 90.953(1), the agreement would have not only to evidence a right to the payment . . . F.S.A. 425, § 90.953 (1976). . . .

GASTROENTEROLOGY ASSOCIATES P. A. v. MATUSON, 9 Fla. Supp. 2d 94 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1985)

. . . Section 90.953 of the Florida Evidence Codes provides in pertinent part 90.953 Admissibility of duplicates . . . the admissibility of appellant’s duplicates since the duplicates come under the purview of Section 90.953 . . .

FREDERICKS, v. G. HOWELL,, 426 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . . § 90.953, Fla.Stat. (1981). . . .

G. E. G. a v. STATE, 417 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1982)

. . . as did both the third district court in Alexander and the fifth district court in this case. .See § 90.953 . . .

LOWERY, v. STATE, 402 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . instrument and, therefore, a duplicate of it is not admissible in place of the original pursuant to section 90.953 . . .

CONTES v. ZANZARELLA, 47 Fla. Supp. 78 (Broward Cty. Ct. 1977)

. . . The carbon copy is not admissible because it is not the best evidence as provided in Section 90.953, . . .