## Facts

- A collision occurred on June 7, 1973, at the intersection of U.S. Route 20 (four-lane divided highway) and State Route 4 (two-lane road) in Ohio between a Plymouth Valiant traveling on Route 4 and a Ford semi-tractor truck traveling on Route 20.
- Five Valiant occupants died, and a sixth occupant, Cindy A. Baker, was seriously injured; she had no memory of the event and there were no surviving eyewitnesses from the Valiant.
- The intersection used a sensor-operated traffic signal whose default state favored Route 20; the timing sequence depended on sensor activation and a six-second interval without Route 20 sensor activation.
- The truck driver, Joseph L. Slabach, stated he was blinded by the setting sun and did not see the traffic light, but recalled traffic moving on Route 20 and not on Route 4.
- A police sergeant with extensive experience arrived within minutes, examined physical evidence (including vehicle positions and roadway markings), interviewed Slabach, and prepared a formal accident report.
- The report recorded Slabach’s statement, reconstructed the signal sequence based on the sensor system and observed conditions, and concluded the Valiant entered on a red light and was at fault.
- Plaintiffs (Baker and estates of the decedents) sued Slabach and his employer, Elcona Homes Corporation, alleging negligence based on the truck’s allegedly entering against a red light.
- Over objection, the trial court admitted the accident report, and the jury returned a defense verdict.

## Issues

1. Whether the police accident report, including the officer’s reconstruction and fault conclusion, was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) as a public record of “factual findings” from an authorized investigation.
2. Whether the truck driver’s recorded statement within the report was inadmissible hearsay (or hearsay within hearsay).
3. Whether evidence that no traffic citation was issued to the truck driver was improperly admitted and required reversal.
4. Whether the jury instructions on causation and burden of proof misstated the law or misled the jury.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the judgment for defendants.
- The accident report was admissible under Rule 803(8) as trustworthy factual findings from an official investigation, even though it contained evaluative conclusions about fault.
- The inclusion and use of Slabach’s statement in the report did not warrant reversal given his in-court testimony, cross-examination, and the limited use of the statement in context.
- Any error related to mention of the absence of a traffic citation was harmless.
- The jury instructions, read as a whole, accurately stated negligence and proximate-cause requirements; the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8), public records containing “factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law” may be admitted in civil cases if circumstances indicate trustworthiness.
- “Factual findings” under Rule 803(8) may include evaluative conclusions drawn from an investigator’s on-scene observations and analysis, not solely raw or purely objective data.
- Trustworthiness may be supported by factors such as prompt investigation, personal observation of physical evidence, subject-matter knowledge, and absence of bias or motive to misrepresent.
- A statement included within an investigative report does not necessarily require exclusion where the declarant testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination, and the challenged use does not create unfair prejudice.
- Admission of marginally relevant official-action evidence (such as absence of a citation) may be treated as harmless error where it is unlikely to have affected the verdict in light of the full evidentiary record.
- Jury instructions are reviewed as a whole; reversible error requires a materially misleading statement of the governing burden of proof or causation standard.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit upheld a defense verdict in a fatal-collision negligence case, concluding that a police accident report—containing an officer’s reconstruction and fault determination—was admissible as trustworthy “factual findings” under Rule 803(8), and that alleged evidentiary and instructional errors did not justify reversal.


Baker v. Elcona Homes Corp., 588 F.2d 551 (6th Cir. 1978)