Sana v. Hawaiian Cruises, Ltd. - 181 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 1999)

Rule:

Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) excepts from the hearsay rule a report of acts, events, or conditions made at or near the time by a person with knowledge, if kept in the ordinary course of a regularly conducted business activity and if it is the regular practice of that business activity to make the report unless the source of the information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness.

Facts:

Defendant ship owner's employee slipped into a coma from brain inflammation. Plaintiff employee's father sued defendant seeking maintenance and cure. The district court granted defendant leave to amend its answer by pleading limitation of liability under 46 U.S.C.S. § 183(a). Defendant's insurer's agent interviewed employee's co-workers who claimed employee was behaving strangely at work. The district court refused to let the president testify regarding agent's interview report and denied relief to plaintiff because he did not prove employee's illness manifested itself on or before his last work day. Plaintiff appealed, arguing that the district court erred in refusing to let the president testify regarding agent's interview report, and in allowing defendant to amend its answer to plead a limitation of liability. 

Issue:

1. Did the district court err in refusing to let the president testify regarding agent's interview report? 
2. Did the district court err in allowing defendant to amend its answer to plead a limitation of liability? 

Answer:

1) Yes. 2) No.

Conclusion:

The court reversed and remanded for new trial because the district court should have admitted agent's report as a business record under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6). According to the court, Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) excepted from the hearsay rule a report of acts, events, or conditions made at or near the time by a person with knowledge, if kept in the ordinary course of a regularly conducted business activity and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the report unless the source of the information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Anent the second issue, the court affirmed defendant's leave to amend its answer because limitations period in 46 U.S.C.S. § 185 did not apply to an assertion of the limitation of liability defense of § 183(a) in an answer.