R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY
v.
ROSS DUBINS, ETC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting business records and statements of the declarant's then-existing mental, emotional, or physical condition under Florida's hearsay exceptions.
[1] A party may lay a foundation for the business records exception to the hearsay rule through testimony of a records custodian, a certification or declaration satisfying st…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“once the proponent lays the predicate for admission of documents set forth in the statute and reflected in our case law, 'the burden shifts to the opposing party to prove that the records are untrustworthy'”
Discussing the burden of proof for business records admissibility under Florida law
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appealed from a circuit court decision in Miami-Dade County involving the estate of Josephine Dubins. The appeal concern…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Business Records Exception To Hearsay Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed February 26, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1031 Lower Tribunal No. 08-1470 ________________
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Appellant,
vs.
Ross Dubins, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Josephine Dubins, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Migna Sanchez-Llorens, Judge.
King & Spalding LLP, and Val Leppert, Drew T. Bell (Austin, TX) and William L. Durham II (Atlanta, GA), for appellant.
Eaton & Wolk, PL, and Douglas F. Eaton, for appellee.
Before EMAS, SCALES and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
Affirmed. See LEA Indus., Inc. v. Raelyn Int'l Inc., 363 So. 2d 49, 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (“[I]t lies within the trial court's discretion to determine whether admission of . . . business records is justified.”); Jackson v. Household Fin. Corp. III, 236 So. 3d 1170, 1172 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018), approved, 298 So. 3d 531, 535-36 (Fla. 2020) (“A party can lay a foundation for the business records exception in three ways: (1) offering testimony of a records custodian, (2) presenting a certification or declaration that each of the elements has been satisfied, or (3) obtaining a stipulation of admissibility”; and “once the proponent lays the predicate for admission of documents set forth in the statute and reflected in our case law, ‘the burden shifts to the opposing party to prove that the records are untrustworthy’”) (additional quotation omitted); see also § 90.803(3)(a) Fla. Stat. (2023) (providing the following exception to the hearsay rule: “(3) Then-existing mental, emotional, or physical condition.-- (a) A statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind, emotion, or physical sensation, including a statement of intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, or bodily health, when such evidence is offered to: 1. Prove the declarant's state of mind, emotion, or physical sensation at that time or at any other time when such state is an issue in the action. 2. Prove or explain acts of subsequent
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- LEA Indus., Inc. v. Raelyn Int'l, Inc., 363 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Jackson v. Household Fin. Corp. III, 298 So. 3d 531 (Fla. 2020)
- Jackson v. Household Fin. Corp. I I I, 236 So. 3d 1170 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)