Meyers v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · 1948 · Evidence

171 F.2d 800 (1948)

Updated August 1, 2026

Evidencebest evidencetestimony about transcriptsbest evidence ruleoral testimonytranscriptstenographic recordperjury

Facts

At Meyers's trial for subornation of perjury, the government called William P. Rogers, counsel to the Senate subcommittee who had heard Lamarre testify, to describe what Lamarre had said before the subcommittee. Later, the government also introduced the stenographic transcript of Lamarre's testimony. Meyers argued this was unfair and improper because the transcript itself was the best evidence of the prior testimony. The appellate court addressed whether oral testimony from a hearer was admissible despite the existence of a transcript.

Issue

When prior oral testimony has been stenographically transcribed, does the best evidence rule require the transcript to be used exclusively, thereby barring testimony from a person who heard the testimony? More specifically, was Rogers's testimony inadmissible because the transcript was the supposed best evidence?

Rule

The best evidence rule, as generally applied in federal courts, is limited to situations in which the contents of a writing are to be proved. Where the issue is what a person orally said, a stenographic transcript is admissible evidence of that statement but is not the only admissible evidence; any person who heard the statement and remembers it may testify to it.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a fraud trial in Chicago, the prosecution wants to prove what Nolan Price told a state licensing board during a live hearing. An official court reporter prepared a stenographic transcript, but the prosecution first calls board counsel, Dana Mercer, who personally heard the testimony and remembers it clearly.

If defense counsel objects that the transcript is the best evidence and therefore Dana may not testify from memory, how should the court rule?

Explanation. The governing rule is that the best evidence rule is limited to proving the contents of a writing. Where the issue is what a person said at an earlier hearing, a stenographic transcript is one form of evidence of that oral statement, but it is not exclusive evidence. A person who heard the testimony and remembers it may also testify.