If a claimant contends the original holographic will is invalid for reasons beyond authenticity, why might a photocopy still be admissible?

If a claimant contends the original holographic will is invalid for reasons beyond authenticity, why might a photocopy still be admissible?

• A. Because photocopies are never allowed.
• B. Because duplicates are admissible unless authenticity is in doubt.
• C. Because the original must always be produced.
• D. Because the court may ignore authenticity entirely.

Answer: (B)

The main concept is that duplicates are usually admissible to prove the contents of a writing when the authenticity of the original is not in dispute. In this scenario, the claimant challenges the holographic will on grounds other than authenticity (for example, capacity or improper execution). Since authenticity isn’t in doubt, a photocopy—the duplicate of the original—can be admitted to prove the terms of the will. The rule is that a duplicate may be used to prove the same as the original unless there is a genuine question about the original’s authenticity or a requirement that the original be produced by law. So a photocopy is admissible because there’s no authentic-ty doubt, and duplicates are allowed under that condition.

The main concept is that duplicates are usually admissible to prove the contents of a writing when the authenticity of the original is not in dispute.

In this scenario, the claimant challenges the holographic will on grounds other than authenticity (for example, capacity or improper execution). Since authenticity isn’t in doubt, a photocopy—the duplicate of the original—can be admitted to prove the terms of the will. The rule is that a duplicate may be used to prove the same as the original unless there is a genuine question about the original’s authenticity or a requirement that the original be produced by law.

So a photocopy is admissible because there’s no authentic-ty doubt, and duplicates are allowed under that condition.