REVISED JUDICATURE ACT OF 1961
Act 236 of 1961
600.2146 Writing or record made in regular course of business; reproduction admissible in evidence; other circumstances; lack of entry; reproduction as evidence.
Sec. 2146.
A writing or record, whether in the form of an entry in a book or otherwise, made as a memorandum of an act, transaction, occurrence, or event is admissible in evidence in a proceeding in a court or before an officer, arbitrator, or referee in proof of the act, transaction, occurrence, or event if it was made in the regular course of business and it was the regular course of business to make such a memorandum at the time of, or within a reasonable time after, the act, transaction, occurrence, or event. Other circumstances of the making of the writing or record, including lack of personal knowledge by the entrant or maker, may be shown to affect its weight but not its admissibility. The term "business" includes a business, profession, occupation, or calling of any kind. The lack of an entry regarding an act, transaction, occurrence, or event in a writing or record so proved may be received as evidence that the act, transaction, occurrence, or event did not, in fact, take place. A reproduction of such a writing or record is admissible in evidence in a trial, hearing, or proceeding by order of the court, made within its discretion, upon motion with notice of not less than 4 days. All circumstances of the making of the reproduction may be shown upon the trial, hearing, or proceeding to affect the weight but not the admissibility of the evidence.
History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963 ;-- Am. 1992, Act 192, Imd. Eff. Oct. 5, 1992
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
51
cases, 1964–2000 · leading case:
Solomon v. Shuell, 457 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. 1990).
Solomon v. Shuell, 457 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. 1990).
· cites it 12× “We unanimously concluded in Central Fabricators v Big Dutchman, 398 Mich 352 ; 247 NW2d 804 (1976), that an interoffice memorandum of a purported telephone conversation was inadmissible under MCL 600.2146; MSA 27A.2146, [10] the statutory precursor of MRE 803(6).”
Siirila v. Barrios, 248 N.W.2d 171 (Mich. 1976).
· cites it 2× “6(3) requires: "Where the SJI Committee Report recommends that no instruction be given on a particular matter, the court shall not give an instruction on the matter unless it specifically finds for reasons stated in the record that (a) such an instruction is necessary to state…”
Rentz v. Gen. Motors Corp., 245 N.W.2d 705 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 4× “However, Bond v Greenwood, 34 Mich App 41, 43 ; 190 NW2d 731 (1971), clearly establishes that in judicial proceedings, a hospital record is admissible as a business entry under MCLA 600.2146; MSA 27A.2146 if the record contains "a general description of a physical condition, as…”
People v. Gauthier, 184 N.W.2d 488 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).
· cites it 4× “There was testimony that Englehard had been introduced to the defendant Gauthier on at least one occasion and that Englehard, had he seen defendant on the night in question, would have been able to recognize him.”
Henson v. Vets. Cab Co., 185 N.W.2d 383 (Mich. 1971).
· cites it 4× “Vearrindy (1954), 339 Mich 579 , and other Michigan decisions hold this to be the proper procedure when hospital records are admitted in evidence under MCLA § 600.2146 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.”
Carbonell v. Bluhm, 318 N.W.2d 659 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “The term `business' as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit." (Emphasis added.) The rule in MRE 803(6) has been subject to minimal appellate review since 1978,…”
People v. Shipp, 437 N.W.2d 385 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “1961 PA 236 ; MCL 600.2146; MSA 27A.2146. The statute relied upon by the people states in pertinent part: 2 _ *336 Any writing or record whether in the form of an entry in a book or otherwise, made as a memorandum of any act, transaction, occurrence, or event shall be admissible…”
People v. Kirtdoll, 217 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. 1974).
· cites it 2× “entry in a book or otherwise, made as a memorandum of any act, transaction, occurrence or event shall be admissible in evidence in all trials, hearings and proceedings in any cause or suit in any court, or before any officer, arbitrators, or referees, in proof of said act,…”
Powell v. St John Hosp., 614 N.W.2d 666 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
“MCL 600.2146; MSA 27A.2146 provides in pertinent part, “The lack of an entry regarding an act, transaction, occurrence, or event in a writing or record so proved may be received as evidence that the act, transaction, occurrence, or event did not, in fact, take place.”
People v. Herrera, 162 N.W.2d 330 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).
· cites it 2× “Lewis (1940), 294 Mich 684 , for the proposition that hospital records are never admissible under the business entry statute, CLS 1961, § 600.2146 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.2146), in a criminal case, because the accused will be denied his constitutional right to be confronted by…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.