Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements

If a party utilizes in court all or part of a writing or recorded statement, an adverse party may require the introduction, at that time, of any other part—or any other writing or recorded statement—that in fairness ought to be considered at the time.

Committee Notes

Maine Restyling Note [November 2014] Maine Rule 106 is a little broader than its federal counterpart, in that it authorizes the introduction in evidence of a writing or other parts of a writing that is "utilized" in court, not just admitted. This is to allow a party to attempt to counteract potentially incomplete or misleading handling or reference to writings in court even if they are not formally offered in evidence. See Maine

Advisers' Note to Rule 106. This policy choice has been carried over in the restyled Rule.

Federal Advisory Committee Note The language of Rule 106 has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.

Advisers' Note to former M.R. Evid. 106 (February 2, 1976) This rule codifies the familiar principle of "completeness", which is already embodied in M.R.C.P. 32(a)(4) as to depositions. Its purpose is to enable the court to correct the misleading impression created by taking matters out of context. It applies to writings and recorded statements but not to conversations. When part of a writing or recording is introduced, an adverse party has the right to inspect it and move that any other part be put in evidence immediately after the incomplete portion has been introduced, so that its impact will not be lessened by the delay. The court obviously has a large measure of discretion in determining what in fairness should thus be contemporaneously considered. The words "utilized in court" are designed to permit the same procedure when a writing is silent on a point as when it is contrary to the testimony of a witness on the stand. A concession drawn from a witness that his written statement does not include a certain thing may be just as misleading as introduction of a part of a statement contrary to his testimony. The Federal Rule uses "introduced" instead of "utilized in court" and thus does not protect against the misleading effect which may result from the use of a statement without its introduction in evidence. ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE