Appellant's Appendix - Philip D. Stern

Based upon the above, it was error for the trial judge to
conclude that because Sharpe "[wa]s not a business custodian of
[WaMu]," she was not "properly qualified to authenticate the
underlying business records," or that because "she ha[d] no
personal knowledge of any of the business records of [WaMu],
she[] [was] not in a position to testify as to the contents of
those records." In short, the basis for the judge's decision to
exclude the monthly statements was "inconsistent with applicable
law." Pressler & Verniero, supra, comment 4.6. R. 2:10-2.
We do not accept plaintiff's contention that because of the
prevalence of bank mergers and dissolutions, "routine records"
of monthly credit card statements are admissible unless some
"evidence [is] proferred regarding the untrustworthiness and/or
unreliability of the monthly statements."
Plaintiff relies in
part upon our holding in Garden State, supra, for this broad
proposition.
In Garden State, the plaintiff bank's successor, Summit
Bank (Summit), sought summary judgment for the balance of a
construction loan note guaranteed by the defendants.
Garden
State, supra, 341 N.J. Super. at 243. The defendants only
contested the amount due, and argued "that the best evidence
rule [wa]s violated where a summary, rather than the actual
accounting record [wa]s provided." Id. at 244. They "also
9
A-2062-10T4
32a