Home › South Carolina › South Carolina Rules of Evidence › Rule 106

Court Rules Network • courtrules.net

SCRE 106

Not legal advice. Verify against official sources before relying on this text in any legal matter.

Rule 106 Remainder of or Related Writings or Statements

Article I. General Provisions

← Previous Rule 105: Limited Admissibility Next → Rule 201: Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

Rule Text

When a writing, or recorded statement, or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

If someone brings up part of a document or recording during a case, the other side has the right to ask that the rest of it be shown too, right then and there. This stops people from using only the parts of a document that help their side while leaving out the parts that give a fuller or fairer picture.

The idea behind this rule is fairness. If a piece of writing or a recording is taken out of context, it can create a misleading impression. So if one party introduces only a portion, the other party can insist that additional related parts come in at the same time, not later, so the judge or jury can understand the full context right away.

For example, if someone reads a few sentences from a letter to make a point, the other side can ask that the rest of the letter, or other closely related parts, be read too if those parts help explain or balance out what was already shared. This keeps both sides honest and helps make sure decisions are based on complete information instead of cherry picked pieces.

Committee Notes

Note:

The law in this State has been that, when a part of a document or writing is introduced into evidence, the remainder may be introduced by the other party. Dukes v. Smoak, 181 S.C. 182, 186 S.E. 780 (1936). The same rule was applicable to conversations. State v. Jackson, 265 S.C. 278, 217 S.E.2d 794 (1975). However, the party seeking to bring out the remainder had to wait until cross-examination or the presentation of that party's case to do so. This rule, which is identical to the federal rule, changes the prior law as to written or recorded statements. The party seeking to introduce the remainder of a written or recorded statement can now require the remainder to be introduced at the same time the other part of the written or recorded statement is introduced. This rule does not change the order of proof as to the remainder of an unrecorded conversation; the party seeking to bring out the remainder must do so during cross-examination or during that party's case.

← Previous Rule 105: Limited Admissibility Next → Rule 201: Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts