rule of optional completeness
rule of optional completeness. The evidentiary rule providing that 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. • The rule has limitations: first, no utterance can be received if it is irrelevant, and second, the remainder of the utterance must explain the first part. In many jurisdictions, the rule applies to conversations, to an opponent’s admissions, to confessions, and to all other types of writings — even account books. But the Federal Rules of Evidence limit the rule to writings and recorded statements. Fed. R. Evid. 106. In most jurisdictions, including federal, the remainder is admissible unless its admission would be unfair or misleading. — Also termed rule of completeness; doctrine of completeness; doctrine of optional completeness; completeness doctrine; optional-completeness rule; optional-completeness doctrine. [Cases: Criminal Law 396(2); Evidence 155, 383(12).C.J.S. Criminal Law § 758; Evidence §§ 248–250, 816–817.]
