Arrowood Indemnity Co. v. Fasching

Eligibility for the business records exception under OEC 803(6) depends upon: (A) the record itself having the characteristics required by OEC 803(6) and (B) “evidence of the record-making practices of the business that created the record.” Allan v. Oceanside Lumber Co., 214 Or 27, 328 P2d 327 (1958).

Petitioner appealed the trial court’s summary judgment determination, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, in favor of Respondent.  Petitioner assigned error to the trial court’s allowing Respondent to admit documents received from a third party into evidence under the business records hearsay exception, OEC 803(6).  On appeal, Petitioner argued Respondent was required to present evidence of the third party’s record-making practices sufficient for the documents to qualify for the business records exception.  In response, Respondent contended that third-party documents qualify for the business record exception if they were “adopted and relied upon” by the presenting party in “the regular course of its own business, and where the records demonstrate sufficient indicia of trustworthiness.”  Eligibility for the business records exception under OEC 803(6) depends upon: (A) the record itself having the characteristics required by OEC 803(6) and (B) “evidence of the record-making practices of the business that created the record.”  Allan v. Oceanside Lumber Co., 214 Or 27, 328 P2d 327 (1958).  The Court, after examining the text and context of OEC 803(6), found that a party seeking to present a business record “must present evidence regarding the record-making practices of the business that created the hearsay.”  The Court held that the trial court erred in determining the third-party documents qualified for the business record exception because the Respondent “failed to lay the foundation required by OEC 803(6)” by neglecting to present evidence of the third-party’s record-making practices.  Reversed and remanded.