RULE 106. REMAINDER OF OR RELATED WRITINGS OR RECORDED STATEMENTS
If a party introduces all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an opposing party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part - or any other writing or recorded statement - that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time.
Rule 106 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; ________________.
is an expression of what Wigmore has termed "the rules of completeness." VII
Wigmore on Evidence § 2094, et seq. (3d ed. 1940). The rule is not a rule of
admissibility, but rather one dealing with order of proof and, as such, may be considered to
be but a specific application of the general dictates of Rule 611. According to the Advisory Committee's note to 106, FRE: "The rule is based on two
considerations. The first is the misleading impression created by taking matters out of
context. The second is the inadequacy of repair work when delayed to a point later in the
trial." 1 Weinstein's Evidence 106-2. To avoid these problems, Rule 106 requires that the remainder of or related writings or
recordings be admitted at the same time as the principal evidence if the trial court
determines, in fairness, that this ought to be done. The standard of fairness gives the trial
court wide discretion under this rule, which accords with the powers of a trial court to
regulate the mode and order of proof, generally, granted by Rule 611. Thus, the court need
not admit all evidence that may be related to the evidence sought to be introduced. Rules of
relevancy, and other rules of admissibility, generally, should guide the trial court's decision. Rule 106 was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are technical in nature
and no substantive change is intended.
Rule 106 was amended, effective ______________, in response to the December 1, 2011, revision of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
Sources: Joint Procedure Committee Minutes
: of___________________; March 24-25,
1988, page 12; December 3, 1987, page 15; April 8, 1976, page 17; October 1, 1975, page
2. Rule Fed.R.Ev. 106, Federal Rules of Evidence; Rule 106, SBAND proposal. Rules: Considered: Rules 32(a)(4), NDRCivP; Rule 15(e), N.D.R.Crim.P.
Cross Reference: N.D.R.Ev. 611 (Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation); N.D.R.Civ.P. 32 (Using Depositions in Court Proceedings) N.D.R.Crim.P. 15 (Depositions).