Key Takeaway
Court clarifies distinction between judicial notice and CPLR 4518(c) for DOS records, finding uncertified printouts inadmissible despite government website sources.
Understanding the Admissibility of Government Records: A Lesson in Evidence Rules
No-fault insurance litigation frequently involves the use of government records and documents obtained from official websites. However, the distinction between what courts will accept under judicial notice versus what requires formal certification under CPLR 4518(c) can create unexpected pitfalls for practitioners. This distinction becomes particularly crucial when dealing with Department of State (DOS) records and similar governmental documentation.
The Appellate Term’s recent decisions in Throgs Neck Multicare highlight an important evidentiary principle that affects how attorneys must prepare and present their cases. While courts may take judicial notice of certain information available on government websites, this doesn’t automatically make printouts from those sites admissible evidence without proper certification.
This case serves as a reminder that even experienced practitioners can find themselves on the wrong side of evidence rules, particularly when the law continues to evolve around the intersection of traditional evidence requirements and modern digital record-keeping. The ongoing tension between judicial notice principles and certification requirements reflects broader challenges in adapting established legal frameworks to contemporary practice.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Throgs Neck Multicare, P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 51081(U)(App. Term 2d Dept, 2016)
Throgs Neck Multicare, P.C. v Mercury Cas. Co., 2016 NY Slip Op 51083(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2016)
I fell victim to 4518(c) and the case on point: Dyer v 930 Flushing, LLC, 118 AD3d 742 ). Now that I see this case, I vaguely remember reading Dryer and shaking my head. Perhaps I should have banged my head against something so I remembered that when I approved the Reply that went out.
The Court now shook its head at me. The Dryer case found the DOS printouts from the NYS website are not admissible evidence unless certified. (By the way, certifying DOS records is really easy) What is interesting is that judicial notice will be given to various items on governmental websites, so this case is the analogue of those cases.
I sense at some point, the 4518(c) v. Judicial notice cases will get a “Fontanetta v. Doe, 73 AD3d 78 (2d Dept. 2010)” type treatment and a more solid rule will be created. As of now, I was on the losing end of this battle.
Key Takeaway
Government website printouts require proper certification under CPLR 4518(c) to be admissible evidence, despite courts potentially taking judicial notice of the same information. The distinction between judicial notice and evidentiary admissibility continues to create challenges for practitioners, suggesting future appellate guidance may be needed to establish clearer procedural compliance standards.
