Also known as: findings of fact · investigative findings
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A category of statement contained in a public record that sets out the results of an official inquiry conducted under legal authority. The statement qualifies for admission under the public records hearsay exception when offered in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case, provided the opponent does not demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Francisco Frost sued Fusion Power after a workplace accident. The district court credited the testimony of three eyewitnesses and entered judgment for the defendant. On appeal Frost argued the findings were clearly erroneous. The appellate court declined to disturb the findings because the trial judge had observed the witnesses and the record contained no contradictory documentary proof.
Farah Fox sued Flagship Logistics after slipping on algae at a hotel pool. Fox offered the county health department's official investigation report that contained factual findings about pool maintenance failures following a prior drowning. The court admitted the report over a hearsay objection because it set out factual findings from a legally authorized investigation and the opponent failed to show untrustworthiness.
Floyd Franklin sued Foster Forge for breach after a bench trial. The court entered judgment for the defendant based on findings that the product defect was not proven. Franklin moved for a new trial under Rule 59 and asked the court to take additional testimony and amend its findings. The court granted the motion, reopened the record, and issued new findings that altered the judgment.
Faith Fitzgerald sued Franklin Foundry alleging defective manufacturing. The company moved for summary judgment and submitted an agency report containing factual findings from a product-safety investigation. The court treated the report as evidence of the absence of a genuine factual dispute and granted the motion.
Francois Fortier challenged a federal internet regulation as exceeding congressional power. The government introduced a congressional committee report that included factual findings from a legally authorized investigation into online harms. The court relied on those findings to evaluate the statute's scope and upheld the regulation.
Faye Fuller challenged a federal gun-control statute. The government offered an agency report containing factual findings from a legally authorized investigation into the interstate movement of firearms. The court used the findings to assess the statute's connection to interstate commerce and sustained the law.
The record is admissible in a civil case or against the government in a criminal case if it sets out factual findings from a legally authorized investigation and the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
Supporting sources
…ease of review may vary from case to case, it does not follow that the standard of review should vary, much less that explicit findings of fact would even directly address the standard. The question for the courts, as all agree, is not whether as a predicate to legislation Congress in fact found that a particular activity…
…arguing that the reliance on Oneby's case was misplaced. In Oneby the jury returned a special verdict making specific findings of fact. No finding was made with respect to provocation. Absent such a finding the court held that the homicide was murder. Fletcher maintains that in the context of a special verdict it is…
…fact and if the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. There is no requirement that the trial judge make findings of fact
…v. Yamasaki , 442 U. S. 682, 703 (1979). Indeed, the District Court's certification decision rests upon more than 300 findings of fact
…It was this written report that was used to cross-examine Mincey at his subsequent trial. [^maj-12]: The trial court made no findings of fact
No. The presence of independent corroboration such as lab tests and photographs can mitigate concerns arising from delay or interviews. A court may still exclude the report if the combination of delay and reliance on interested parties indicates a lack of trustworthiness.
Supporting sources
The court may amend its findings or make additional findings and amend the judgment accordingly. The motion must be filed no later than twenty-eight days after entry of judgment.
Supporting sources
Yes. A party may later question the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the findings whether or not the party requested findings, objected to them, moved to amend them, or moved for partial findings.
Supporting sources