Legal Definitions - optional completeness, rule of

The Optional Completeness, Rule of is an evidentiary rule that states when a party introduces part of a writing or an utterance at trial, the opposing party may require that the remainder of the passage be read to establish the full context.

For example, if a witness testifies about a conversation they had with someone, the opposing party can request that the entire conversation be read or played to the court to provide a complete understanding of the context.

However, there are limitations to this rule. The remainder of the passage must explain the first part, and it cannot be received if it is irrelevant. In most jurisdictions, the remainder is admissible unless its admission would be unfair or misleading.

The rule of optional completeness applies to various types of writings, including account books, conversations, confessions, and opponent's admissions. However, the Federal Rules of Evidence limit the rule to writings and recorded statements.

Overall, the rule of optional completeness ensures that the court has a complete understanding of the context of the evidence presented, which is essential in making a fair and just decision.