FEDERAL · 28 U.S.C. · Chapter 115
Government records and papers; copies
28 U.S.C. § 1733
Title28 — Judiciary and Judicial Procedure
Chapter115 — EVIDENCE; DOCUMENTARY
This text of 28 U.S.C. § 1733 (Government records and papers; copies) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
28 U.S.C. § 1733.
Text
(a)Books or records of account or minutes of proceedings of any department or agency of the United States shall be admissible to prove the act, transaction or occurrence as a memorandum of which the same were made or kept.
(b)Properly authenticated copies or transcripts of any books, records, papers or documents of any department or agency of the United States shall be admitted in evidence equally with the originals thereof.
(c)This section does not apply to cases, actions, and proceedings to which the Federal Rules of Evidence apply.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United States v. Joseph E. Smith
521 F.2d 957 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)
Independent Iron Works, Inc. v. United States Steel Corp.
322 F.2d 656 (Ninth Circuit, 1963)
Chung Young Chew v. John P. Boyd, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Department of Justice, Seattle District
309 F.2d 857 (Ninth Circuit, 1962)
United States v. Mack Adams
385 F.2d 548 (Second Circuit, 1967)
John William Smith v. Dominick Spina, Individually and as Director of the Police Department of the City of Newark, N. J.
477 F.2d 1140 (Third Circuit, 1973)
Sam MacRi & Sons, Inc., a Corporation, and Continental Casualty Company, a Corporation v. U. S. A. For the Use of Oaks Construction Company
313 F.2d 119 (Ninth Circuit, 1963)
United States v. Albert H. Holmes
387 F.2d 781 (Seventh Circuit, 1968)
Dell Courtney KING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GULF OIL COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
581 F.2d 1184 (Fifth Circuit, 1978)
Langston v. Johnson
478 F.2d 915 (D.C. Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Sandor Regner
677 F.2d 754 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)
United States v. Carl N. Miller, Sr., Administrator of the Estate of Florence M. Batt, Deceased, and Frances Virginia Batt Sutton, Intervening
318 F.2d 637 (Seventh Circuit, 1963)
R. H. Colvin v. United States
479 F.2d 998 (Ninth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Kenneth R. Farris
517 F.2d 226 (Seventh Circuit, 1975)
Robert Benjamin Pardo v. United States
369 F.2d 922 (Fifth Circuit, 1966)
United States v. Razmik Levon Dekermenjian
508 F.2d 812 (Ninth Circuit, 1974)
United States v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc.
747 F.2d 315 (Fifth Circuit, 1984)
United States v. James Franklin Morris, Jr.
451 F.2d 969 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)
Blair H. Raycraft v. Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway Company, a Corporation
472 F.2d 27 (Eighth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Joan D. Hayes
325 F.2d 307 (Fourth Circuit, 1963)
United States v. Donlon
355 F. Supp. 220 (D. Delaware, 1973)
Source Credit
History
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 946; Pub. L. 93–595, §2(c), Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949.)
Editorial Notes
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§661–667, 671 (R.S. §§882–886, 889; July 31, 1894, ch. 174, §§17, 22, 28 Stat. 210; Mar. 2, 1895, ch. 177, §10, 28 Stat. 809; June 10, 1921, ch. 18, §§301, 302, 304, 310, 42 Stat. 23–25; May 10, 1934, ch. 277, §512, 48 Stat. 758; June 19, 1934, ch. 653, §6(a), 48 Stat. 1109).
The consolidation of sections 661–667 and 671 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., permitted omission of obsolete, unnecessary and repetitive provisions in such sections. For example, the provision in section 665 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., authorizing the court to require production of documents on a plea of non est factum, was omitted. Such plea is obsolete in Federal practice.
Numerous provisions with respect to authentication were omitted as covered by Rule 44 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Likewise the provision that official seals shall be judicially noticed was omitted as unnecessary. Seals of Federal agencies are judicially noticed by States and Federal courts without statutory mandate. Gardner v. Barney, 1867, 6 Wall. 499, 73 U.S.C. 499, 18 L.Ed. 890, 31 C.J.S. 599 n. 27–30 and 23 C.J.S. 99 n. 41. The same principle unquestionably will apply to seals of Government corporations.
Words "of any corporation all the stock of which is beneficially owned by the United States, either directly or indirectly", in section 661 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., were omitted as covered by "or agency". The revised section was broadened to apply to "any department or agency". (See reviser's note under section 1345 of this title.)
Changes were made in phraseology.
Editorial Notes
References in Text
The Federal Rules of Evidence, referred to in subsec. (c), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
Amendments
1975—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 93–595 added subsec. (c).
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§661–667, 671 (R.S. §§882–886, 889; July 31, 1894, ch. 174, §§17, 22, 28 Stat. 210; Mar. 2, 1895, ch. 177, §10, 28 Stat. 809; June 10, 1921, ch. 18, §§301, 302, 304, 310, 42 Stat. 23–25; May 10, 1934, ch. 277, §512, 48 Stat. 758; June 19, 1934, ch. 653, §6(a), 48 Stat. 1109).
The consolidation of sections 661–667 and 671 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., permitted omission of obsolete, unnecessary and repetitive provisions in such sections. For example, the provision in section 665 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., authorizing the court to require production of documents on a plea of non est factum, was omitted. Such plea is obsolete in Federal practice.
Numerous provisions with respect to authentication were omitted as covered by Rule 44 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Likewise the provision that official seals shall be judicially noticed was omitted as unnecessary. Seals of Federal agencies are judicially noticed by States and Federal courts without statutory mandate. Gardner v. Barney, 1867, 6 Wall. 499, 73 U.S.C. 499, 18 L.Ed. 890, 31 C.J.S. 599 n. 27–30 and 23 C.J.S. 99 n. 41. The same principle unquestionably will apply to seals of Government corporations.
Words "of any corporation all the stock of which is beneficially owned by the United States, either directly or indirectly", in section 661 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., were omitted as covered by "or agency". The revised section was broadened to apply to "any department or agency". (See reviser's note under section 1345 of this title.)
Changes were made in phraseology.
Editorial Notes
References in Text
The Federal Rules of Evidence, referred to in subsec. (c), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
Amendments
1975—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 93–595 added subsec. (c).
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
28 U.S.C. § 1733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/28/1733.