Fed. R. Evid. 106 — Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements
Plain English
This is the rule of completeness. If your opponent drops in part of a statement, you can immediately require the rest—or another statement—that fairness says should be considered at the same time. Since the 2023 amendment, you can do this even over a hearsay objection.
From the Courtroom
This is your real-time antidote to cherry-picking. When the other side reads a misleading snippet of a deposition, an email, or a recorded statement, Rule 106 lets you put the contextualizing portion in right then—not days later in your own case. The 2023 amendment closed a real loophole: the completing material now comes in even if it would otherwise be hearsay.
Key Points & Authority
- Completeness. When a party introduces all or part of a statement, an adverse party may require introduction, at that time, of any other part or statement that in fairness ought to be considered together.
- 2023 amendment. The completing material is admissible over a hearsay objection.
- Timing. “At that time”—contemporaneous, not deferred to your own case.
Florida Parallel
Florida Parallel: Fed. R. Evid. 106 corresponds to § 90.108, Fla. Stat. (Introduction of related writings or recorded statements). Both codify the rule of completeness for writings and recorded statements; Florida’s statute has its own contours, so compare the texts directly. Cross-reference is text-only for now; live links added in a later interlinking pass.
About this rule walkthrough
Part of The Evidence Code, hosted by John M. Phillips — Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer, Court TV analyst, admitted in 8 states + 9 federal districts + SCOTUS.
Free consultation: (904) 444-4444 · About John Phillips
Educational only — not legal advice.
Rule Text (verbatim from the Florida Supreme Court)
If a party introduces all or part of a statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part — or any other statement — that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. The adverse party may do so over a hearsay objection.
Educational reference. Educational summary of the Federal Rules of Evidence, not legal advice.
What this rule means in plain English
This is the rule of completeness. If your opponent drops in part of a statement, you can immediately require the rest—or another statement—that fairness says should be considered at the same time. Since the 2023 amendment, you can do this even over a hearsay objection.