Palmer v. Hoffman
Citation and Court
318 U.S. 109 (1943), Supreme Court of the United States
Facts
A railroad employee was killed in a grade crossing collision between a train and an automobile. Before his death, the train engineer made a statement to a railroad safety inspector about the accident. The railroad sought to introduce this statement as a business record under the business records exception to the hearsay rule.
Issue
Whether an accident report prepared by a railroad employee shortly after an accident qualifies as a business record admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule.
Holding
The Supreme Court held that the accident report did not qualify as a business record because it was prepared in anticipation of litigation, not in the regular course of the railroad’s operating business.
Rule / Doctrine
The business records exception to hearsay (now codified at FRE 803(6)) applies only to records made in the regular course of a regularly conducted business activity, at or near the time of the events recorded. Reports prepared primarily for litigation — such as accident reports made with the knowledge that litigation is likely — are not made in the “regular course of business” and therefore do not qualify for the exception.
Significance
Palmer v. Hoffman is the leading case establishing that litigation-motivated records do not qualify for the business records hearsay exception. It remains the foundational authority for excluding accident reports and similar documents prepared with an eye toward anticipated litigation.