909.02909.02Self-authentication.Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to any of the following:
909.02(1)(1)Public documents under seal.A document bearing a seal purporting to be that of the United States, or of any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession thereof, or the Panama Canal Zone, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or of a political subdivision, department, officer or agency thereof, and a signature purporting to be an attestation or execution.
909.02(2)(2)Public documents not under the seal.A document purporting to bear the signature in the official capacity of an officer or employee of any entity included in sub. (1), having no seal, if a public officer having a seal and having official duties in the district or political subdivision of the officer or employee certifies under seal that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine.
909.02(3)(3)Public documents of foreign countries.A document purporting to be executed or attested in his or her official capacity by a person authorized by the laws of a foreign country to make the execution or attestation, and accompanied by a final certification as to the genuineness of the signature and official position of the executing or attesting person, or of any foreign official whose certificate of genuineness of signature and official position relates to the execution or attestation or is in a chain of certificates of genuineness of signature and official position relating to the execution or attestation. A final certification may be made by a secretary of embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States, or a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States. If reasonable opportunity has been given to all parties to investigate the authenticity and accuracy of official documents, the judge may, for good cause shown, order that they be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification or permit them to be evidenced by an attested summary with or without final certification.
909.02(4)(4)Certified copies of public records.A copy of an official record or report or entry therein, or of a document authorized by law to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed in a public office, including data compilations in any form, certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification, by certificate complying with sub. (1), (2) or (3) or complying with any statute or rule adopted by the supreme court, or, with respect to records maintained by the department of transportation under s. 110.20 or chs. 194, 218, 341 to 343, 345, or 348, certified electronically in any manner determined by the department of transportation to conform with the requirements of s. 909.01.
909.02(5)(5)Official publications.Books, pamphlets or other publications purporting to be issued by public authority.
909.02(6)(6)Newspapers and periodicals.Printed materials purporting to be newspapers or periodicals.
909.02(7)(7)Trade inscriptions and the like.Inscriptions, signs, tags or labels purporting to have been affixed in the course of business and indicating ownership, control or origin.
909.02(8)(8)Acknowledged and authenticated documents.Documents accompanied by a certificate of acknowledgment under the hand and seal or rubber stamp of a notary public or other person authorized by law to take acknowledgments or any public officer entitled by virtue of public office to administer oaths or authenticated or acknowledged as otherwise authorized by statute.
909.02(9)(9)Commercial paper and related documents.Commercial paper, signatures thereon, and documents relating thereto to the extent provided by chs. 401 to 411.
909.02(10)(10)Statutory rules.Any signature, document or other matter declared by statute to be presumptively or prima facie genuine or authentic.
909.02(11)(11)Patient health care records.Records served upon or made available to all parties under s. 908.03 (6m).
909.02(12)(12)Certified domestic records of regularly conducted activity.
909.02(12)(a)(a) The original or a duplicate of a domestic record of regularly conducted activity that would be admissible under s. 908.03 (6) if accompanied by a written certification of its custodian or other qualified person, in a manner complying with any statute or rule adopted by the supreme court, certifying all of the following:
909.02(12)(a)1.1. That the record was made at or near the time of the occurrence of the matters set forth by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge of those matters.
909.02(12)(a)2.2. That the record was kept in the course of the regularly conducted activity.
909.02(12)(a)3.3. That the record was made of the regularly conducted activity as a regular practice.
909.02(12)(b)(b) A party intending to offer a record into evidence under par. (a) must provide written notice of that intention to all adverse parties and must make the record and certification available for inspection sufficiently in advance of the offer of the record and certification into evidence to provide an adverse party with a fair opportunity to challenge the record and certification.
909.02(13)(13)Certified foreign records of regularly conducted activity.
909.02(13)(a)(a) The original or a duplicate of a foreign record of regularly conducted activity that would be admissible under s. 908.03 (6) if accompanied by a written declaration by its custodian or other qualified person certifying all of the following:
909.02(13)(a)1.1. That the record was made at or near the time of the occurrence of the matters set forth by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge of those matters.
909.02(13)(a)2.2. That the record was kept in the course of the regularly conducted activity.
909.02(13)(a)3.3. That the record was made of the regularly conducted activity as a regular practice.
909.02(13)(b)(b) The declaration under par. (a) must be signed in a manner that, if falsely made, would subject the maker to criminal penalty under the laws of the country where the declaration is signed. A party intending to offer a record into evidence under par. (a) must provide written notice of that intention to all adverse parties, and must make the record and declaration available for inspection sufficiently in advance of the offer of the record and declaration into evidence to provide an adverse party with a fair opportunity to challenge the record and declaration.
909.02 AnnotationComment, October 2005: Creation of sub. (12) conforms Wisconsin’s rule to the 2000 amendment of Rule 902 (11) of the Federal Rule of Evidence. [Re Sup. Ct. Order No. 04-09]
909.02 AnnotationCreation of sub. (13) conforms Wisconsin’s rule to the 2000 amendment of Rule 902 (12) of the Federal Rule of Evidence. [Re Sup. Ct. Order No. 04-09]
909.02 AnnotationThe trial court erred in applying the certification requirement under s. 889.08 (1) to the defendant’s driving record that was certified under sub. (1). State v. Leis, 134 Wis. 2d 441, 397 N.W.2d 498 (Ct. App. 1986).
909.02 AnnotationPresentment to the trier of fact in a mortgage foreclosure proceeding of the original, wet-ink note endorsed in blank establishes the holder’s possession and entitles the holder to enforce the note. Under sub. (9), presentment may be accomplished through the holder’s attorney without the need for testimony regarding how the holder came to possess the note. An attorney presenting self-authenticating evidence to the trier of fact on behalf of the attorney’s client is not acting in the same capacity as a witness delivering testimonial evidence. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Wuensch, 2018 WI 35, 380 Wis. 2d 727, 911 N.W.2d 1, 15-0175. See also Federal National Mortgage Ass’n v. Thompson, 2018 WI 57, 381 Wis. 2d 609, 912 N.W.2d 364, 16-1496.
909.02 AnnotationA copy of an official record may be admitted in evidence if it is certified as correct in accordance with sub. (4) even though the certification does not comply with s. 889.08 (1). 63 Atty. Gen. 605.
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Thomas P. Wuensch (2018) wis · cites it 20דSuch testimony is entirely unnecessary where, as here, no extrinsic evidence was needed to admit the Note, Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (9), and no testimony was needed to explain the circumstances of Deutsche Bank's possession; rather, the Bank had the right to enforce the Note endorsed…”
State v. Doss (2008) wis · cites it 5דIn this case, a comparable closely related statute which was not in force at the time this action commenced but which is relevant for sake of comparison is Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (12)(2005-06). Section 909.”
State v. Smith (2004) wisctapp · cites it 9דFinally, Wis. Stat. § 909.02 provides that extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not a condition precedent to admissibility for: (1) Public doouments undee seal.”
PALISADES COLLECTION LLC v. Kalal (2010) wisctapp · cites it 2ד2 The circuit court also concluded that the bank statements were self-authenticating documents, see Wis. Stat. § 909.02 , but we do not address this aspect of the court's ruling because the Kalals do not challenge it on appeal.”
State v. Leis (1986) wisctapp · cites it 12דThe trial court suppressed the record because it was not self-authenticating under sec. 909.02, Stats., 2 and because the accompanying certificate did not state that the legal custodian *443 had personally compared the copies with the originals, as required by sec.”
Dow Family, LLC v. PHH Mortgage Corp. (2013) wisctapp · cites it 4דConsequently, neither Lonzo's nor Callahan's affidavit is sufficient to authenticate the copy of the note. ¶ 22. PHH contends it did not need to rely on witness testimony to authenticate the copy of the note because a note is commercial paper and is therefore self-authenticating…”
Liles v. Employers Mutual Insurance (1985) wisctapp · cites it 2דWe agree with Employers’s argument that the report issued by the Arizona Department of Health Services was admissible under sec. 909.02(5), Stats. This statute provides that extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not a condition precedent to admissibility with respect to…”
Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Olson (2015) wisctapp · cites it 7ד03 (24) and whether the trial court properly refused to admit the Bank of America certification under Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (12). 17 By the Court.”
Nelson v. Zeimetz (1989) wisctapp · cites it 4דThe letter was attached to an affidavit by Nelson's attorney. *797 Protective objected to this letter at different times on the bases of hearsay and authentication.”
State v. George Steven Burch (2021) wis · cites it 4דThe circuit court did so here by reviewing the Fitbit records and the affidavit of "a duly authorized custodian of Fitbit's records" averring that the records "are true and correct copies of Fitbit's customer data records," and then concluding the data was self-authenticating…”
State v. George Steven Burch (2021) wis · cites it 4דThe circuit court did so here by reviewing the Fitbit records and the affidavit of "a duly authorized custodian of Fitbit's records" averring that the records "are true and correct copies of Fitbit's customer data records," and then concluding the data was self-authenticating…”
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Terry L. Constant (2020) wis · cites it 3ד¶38 The OLR says Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (12) does not require the person certifying the record to state the source of their knowledge.”
State v. Leis (1986) wisctapp“The trial court suppressed the record because it was not self-authenticating under sec. 909.02, Stats., 2 and because the accompanying certificate did not state that the legal custodian *443 had personally compared the copies with the originals, as required by sec.”
State v. Smith (2004) wisctapp“Finally, Wis. Stat. § 909.02 provides that extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not a condition precedent to admissibility for: (1) Public doouments undee seal.”
— Wis. Stat. § 909.02(12) — 3 cases
State v. Doss (2008) wis“In this case, a comparable closely related statute which was not in force at the time this action commenced but which is relevant for sake of comparison is Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (12)(2005-06). Section 909.”
Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Olson (2015) wisctapp“03 (24) and whether the trial court properly refused to admit the Bank of America certification under Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (12). 17 By the Court.”
Nelson v. Zeimetz (1989) wisctapp“The letter was attached to an affidavit by Nelson's attorney. *797 Protective objected to this letter at different times on the bases of hearsay and authentication.”
State v. Smith (2004) wisctapp“Finally, Wis. Stat. § 909.02 provides that extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not a condition precedent to admissibility for: (1) Public doouments undee seal.”
— Wis. Stat. § 909.02(5) — 2 cases
Liles v. Employers Mutual Insurance (1985) wisctapp“We agree with Employers’s argument that the report issued by the Arizona Department of Health Services was admissible under sec. 909.02(5), Stats. This statute provides that extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not a condition precedent to admissibility with respect to…”
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Thomas P. Wuensch (2018) wis“Such testimony is entirely unnecessary where, as here, no extrinsic evidence was needed to admit the Note, Wis. Stat. § 909.02 (9), and no testimony was needed to explain the circumstances of Deutsche Bank's possession; rather, the Bank had the right to enforce the Note endorsed…”
Dow Family, LLC v. PHH Mortgage Corp. (2013) wisctapp“Consequently, neither Lonzo's nor Callahan's affidavit is sufficient to authenticate the copy of the note. ¶ 22. PHH contends it did not need to rely on witness testimony to authenticate the copy of the note because a note is commercial paper and is therefore self-authenticating…”
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.
