WCL - Home  
    AU | Search | Site Map | Contact  
ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE

Table of Contents

Article I. General Provisions
Article II. Judicial Notice
Rule 201
Rule 202
Rule 203
Rule 204
Article III. Presumptions
Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits
Article V. Privileges
Article VI. Witnesses
Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony
Article VIII. Hearsay
Article X. Contents of Writings, Recordings,
and Photographs

Revised Rule 204. Proving Law [changes highlighted]

(a) Scope of rule. This rule is applicable only in situations in which the court is not required to take judicial notice or in its discretion determines that judicial notice is inappropriate under Rule 203.

Click here to see commentary on Revised Article 204(a). 

(b) Issue of law. Where proof of law is required under this rule the question shall be one of law for the court and not of fact for the finder of fact.

Click here to see commentary on Revised Article 204(b). 

(c) Method of Proving Law. After a party has given notice by pleadings or other reasonable written notice, law may be proven by any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a party or admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. If the court relies on information from sources other than those otherwise submitted by the parties, the court should afford the parties a sufficient opportunity to address the appropriateness of such materials before the court makes its final decision on the application and interpretation of the law, unless the interests of justice would not be served thereby.

Click here to see commentary on Revised Article 204(c). 

(d) Burden of proof for foreign law. The court may allocate the burden of proving foreign law as it deems appropriate.

Click here to see commentary on Revised Article 204(d). 

(e) Failure to prove foreign law. This section governs situations in which the court has not taken judicial notice of foreign law under Rule 203 or where a party has failed to meet its burden of proving foreign law. (i) In proceedings in which the court is required to apply state law, either by reason of diversity jurisdiction or otherwise, the court shall apply the same presumptions and other applicable rules governing the conflict of law rules that the state court in the State in which the United States District Court where the action is commenced sits would apply. (ii) In proceedings in which jurisdiction is based on a federal question but foreign law may nonetheless be properly applied to a particular issue or issues, the court shall apply the presumptions and other applicable rules governing conflict of laws as developed through federal case law or otherwise.

Click here to see commentary on Revised Article 204(e). 

Revised Rule 204. Proving Law [clean copy]

(a) Scope of rule. This rule is applicable only in situations in which the court is not required to take judicial notice or in its discretion determines that judicial notice is inappropriate under Rule 203.

(b) Issue of law. Where proof of law is required under this rule the question shall be one of law for the court and not of fact for the finder of fact.

(c) Method of Proving Law. After a party has given notice by pleadings or other reasonable written notice, law may be proven by any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a party or admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. If the court relies on information from sources other than those otherwise submitted by the parties, the court should afford the parties a sufficient opportunity to address the appropriateness of such materials before the court makes its final decision on the application and interpretation of the law, unless the interests of justice would not be served thereby.

(d) Burden of proof for foreign law. The court may allocate the burden of proving foreign law as it deems appropriate.

(e) Failure to prove foreign law. This section governs situations in which the court has not taken judicial notice of foreign law under Rule 203 or where a party has failed to meet its burden of proving foreign law. (i) In proceedings in which the court is required to apply state law, either by reason of diversity jurisdiction or otherwise, the court shall apply the same presumptions and other applicable rules governing the conflict of law rules that the state court in the State in which the United States District Court where the action is commenced sits would apply. (ii) In proceedings in which jurisdiction is based on a federal question but foreign law may nonetheless be properly applied to a particular issue or issues, the court shall apply the presumptions and other applicable rules governing conflict of laws as developed through federal case law or otherwise.

E-MAIL YOUR COMMENTS