Bank of America, N.A., v. Carlson

“Those statements were not admissible under the hearsay exception for business records under OEC 803(6), which, subject to various requirements, allows for the admission of a ‘memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form’…‘no part of that rule purports to render testimony about [the records] admissible over a hearsay objection.’” U.S. Bank National Assn. v. McCoy, 290 Or App 525, 534-536, 415 P3d 1116 (2018) (emphasis in original).

Defendants appealed summary judgment granted in favor of Plaintiff in a judicial foreclosure action. Defendants assigned error to Plaintiff's status as a party entitled to enforce Defendant's promissory note. On appeal, Defendants argued that Plaintiff’s declarations from bank employees that the bank was in possession of the promissory note was inadmissible hearsay. The declarations were the only evidence produced that supported Plaintiff’s ability to foreclose and enforce the promissory note. “Th[e] statements were not admissible under the hearsay exception for business records under OEC 803(6), which, allows for the admission of a ‘memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form’" however, "‘no part of that rule purports to render testimony about [the records] admissible over a hearsay objection.’” U.S. Bank National Assn. v. McCoy, 290 Or App 525, 534-536, 415 P3d 1116 (2018) (emphasis in original). The Court found that the declarations provided stated that Plaintiffs were in possession of the promissory notes, but did not purport when the Plaintiffs came into possession of those notes. The Court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the record did not contain any other admissible evidence that provided Plaintiff was entitled to enforce the promissory note at the time Plaintiff filed for foreclosure. Reversed and remanded.