Thomas Arthur Taylor, Jr. v. Maritime Overseas Corporation (Virginia 1983)

Summary

The court held that the Coast Guard inspection book was inadmissible at the first trial because it was not authenticated as required for official records, even though it otherwise qualified under the official-records hearsay exception. Taylor preserved the authentication objection, and none of Maritime's alternative grounds supported ordering a new trial because the purported after-discovered evidence was always available and the first verdict was not conscience-shocking. The court therefore reversed the judgment entered after the second trial, set aside the second verdict, and reinstated the first verdict.

Holding

Admissibility and authentication of the Coast Guard inspection book. The inspection book qualified as an official document and would have been admissible under the official written statements exception, but it was inadmissible at the first trial because it was not authenticated by proof that the certifying officer was the custodian and that the person signing the transmittal was the person to whom the custodian reported.

Preservation of the authentication objection. Taylor preserved his authentication objection even though the trial court initially ruled on hearsay grounds, because the record showed that the trial court understood the objection to include both hearsay and lack of authentication.

After-discovered evidence. Maritime was not entitled to a new trial based on after-discovered evidence because the payment documents were in its possession before trial and its own response to an interrogatory showed that counsel knew the maintenance-payment issue would arise.

Excessiveness of the first verdict. The $25,000 verdict was not so excessive or shocking to the conscience as to justify disturbing it.

Thomas Arthur Taylor, Jr. v. Maritime Overseas Corporation

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by