Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey
| Beech Aircraft Corporation v. Rainey | |
|---|---|
| Argued October 4, 1988 Decided December 12, 1988 | |
| Full case name | Beech Aircraft Corporation, Petitioner v. John C. Rainey, et al. |
| Citations | 488 U.S. 153 (more) 109 S. Ct. 439; 102 L. Ed. 2d 445; 1988 U.S. LEXIS 5631; 57 U.S.L.W. 4043; 26 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 257; 1989 AMC 441 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Cert. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |
| Holding | |
| Portions of investigatory reports otherwise admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C) are not inadmissible merely because they state a conclusion or opinion. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy; Rehnquist, O'Connor (parts I, II) |
| Concur/dissent | Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor |
Beech Aircraft Corporation v. Rainey, 488 U.S. 153 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court case that addressed a longstanding conflict among the Federal Courts of Appeals over whether Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C), which provides an exception to the hearsay rule for public investigatory reports containing "factual findings," extends to conclusions and opinions contained in such reports. The court also considered whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to admit, on cross-examination, testimony intended to provide a more complete picture of a document about which the witness had testified on direct.