Brief Fact Summary
Defendant, Lamarre, was prosecuted for subornation of perjury for his testimony before a United States Senate subcommittee. Although a transcript of defendant's testimony was available, William P. Rogers, chief counsel to the senatorial subcommittee, who had examined Lamarre, was permitted to testify as to what Lamarre had sworn to the subcommittee.

Rule of Law and Holding
The best evidence rule is limited to cases where the contents of a writing are to be proved. In this case, the Court held that there was no attempt to prove the contents of a writing and therefore the best evidence rule did not apply and the testimony of William P. Rogers was admissible.

Topics
Writings

Subtopics
Best Evidence Rule