Piedmont Plastics, Inc. v. Mize Co., Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WHICHARD, Judge.
Third party defendants first contend that a tally sheet showing records of service calls made by third party defendant Southern Agricultural Chemicals for the purpose of replacing defective rollers fell within the business records exception to the hearsay rule, and thus was improperly excluded. We find no error.
Business records are admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule if “(1) the entries are made in the regular course of business; (2) the entries are made contemporaneously with the events recorded; (3) the entries are original entries; and (4) the entries are based…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Perfecting Service Co. v. Product Development & Sales Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Hege v. SellersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Ray D. Lowder, Inc. v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
- Binder v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Dairy & Ice Cream Supply Co. v. Gastonia Ice Cream Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Pleasant Valley Promenade v. Lechmere, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
- Pinner v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Wright v. American General Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. FriendCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
- Crescent Univ. City Venture, LLC v. Ap Atl., Inc.North Carolina Business Court · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.