O.C.G.A. § 24-10-1007 (2019)
Testimony or written admission of party
The contents of writings, recordings, or photographs may be proved by the testimony or deposition of the party against whom offered or by that party’s written admission, without accounting for the nonproduction of the original.
History
Code 1981, § 24-10-1007, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.
Annotations
Cross references. Testimony or a statement of a party to prove content, Fed. R. Evid. 1007.
Law reviews. For article, “Dancing with the Big Boys: Georgia Adopts (most of) the Federal Rules of Evidence,” see 63 Mercer L. Rev. 1 (2011).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS ANALYSIS GENERAL CONSIDERATION SPECIFIC WRITINGS PRODUCED UNDER NOTICE General Consideration Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1873, § 3836, former Code 1882, § 3836, former Civil Code 1910, § 5832, and former Code 1933, § 38-705 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Writing with subscribing witnesses. - When a writing was offered in evidence, to which there was a subscribing witness, the latter must be produced in all cases, except in the five instances specified in former Civil Code 1910, § 5833 (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-9-903), and those named in former Civil Code 1910, § 5832. Lamb v.
Empire Life Ins. Co., 143 Ga. 180, 84 S.E. 439, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 337 (1915) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 5832). Reliance on writing creates presumption of validity. - Reason of the former statute was founded in the fact that when a paper was drawn out from the possession of a party claiming title or other benefit under the paper, that the presumption of the law was that one relied upon its genuineness and validity, and, therefore, the producing dispenses with the proof. Campbell v. Roberts, 66 Ga. 733, 1881 Ga. LEXIS 100 (1881) (decided under former Code 1873, § 3836). Failure to prove execution. - There
General Consideration (Cont’d) was no error in admitting in evidence a document sued on, over the objection that the document’s execution had not been sufficiently shown at the time, notwithstanding the general rule that “where the execution of a note is denied by a plea of non est factum, the note will not be received until some extrinsic evidence of its execution has been submitted.” Mendel v. Converse & Co., 30 Ga. App. 549, 118 S.E. 586, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 527 (1923) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 5832). Claim of benefit. - To hold a paper as a receipt or voucher is a sufficient claim of
benefit under it to meet the requirements of law. Louisville & N.R.R. v. Yudelson, 135 Ga. 731, 70 S.E. 576, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 65 (1911) (decided under former Civil Code 1910, § 5832). Specific Writings Produced Under Notice Irrelevant paper. - Production of a paper, upon notice that is not relevant to the issue, but which recites another paper that is pertinent and material, will not overcome the necessity of proof of execution of the latter paper that is material. Doe v. Guthry, 32 Ga. 307, 1861 Ga. LEXIS 181 (1861) (decided under former law).
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Production, in response to call therefor by adverse party, of document otherwise
inadmissible in evidence, as making it admissible, 151 A.L.R. 1006.