## Facts

- A contractor, Peter Suzio, contracted with the City of South Bend to construct a sewer and agreed to furnish and pay for all required materials.
- Suzio and Federal Union Surety Company executed a performance bond securing faithful performance of the contract, including payment for materials.
- Indiana Lumber & Manufacturing Company supplied lumber and other materials to Suzio for use on the sewer project.
- Indiana Lumber recorded orders and deliveries using an autographic register that produced three identical slips simultaneously from a single writing; one slip went with the goods to Suzio and two were retained by Indiana Lumber.
- Suzio failed to pay the full balance due for the materials.
- Indiana Lumber sued Suzio and Federal Union on the bond for the unpaid amount and offered the retained slips to prove the transactions.
- The surety objected under the best-evidence rule, arguing the slip delivered to Suzio was the “original” and had to be produced or its absence explained.
- The trial court admitted the retained slips and entered judgment for Indiana Lumber against Suzio and the surety.

## Issues

1. Whether slips retained by a seller, created simultaneously with matching slips delivered to the buyer by an autographic register, are admissible as original writings under the best-evidence rule.
2. Whether the surety could be held liable on the contractor’s bond for the unpaid cost of materials furnished for the bonded public-works contract.

## Decision

- The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for Indiana Lumber.
- The court held that the autographic-register slips were “duplicate originals” because they were produced simultaneously by a single act of writing.
- The best-evidence rule did not require production of the particular slip delivered to the contractor; any one of the original counterparts could be admitted if authenticated.
- The court left undisturbed the trial court’s finding that the materials were furnished for the sewer project and were within the bond’s coverage, supporting liability against the surety.

## Legal Principles

- When a mechanical process produces multiple identical writings simultaneously from one act of execution, each counterpart is an original for best-evidence purposes.
- The best-evidence rule is satisfied by introducing any one of several original counterparts; a party need not produce a specific counterpart held by an opposing party merely because it also exists.
- A surety on a contractor’s bond conditioned on faithful performance, including payment for project materials, may be liable to a supplier for unpaid materials furnished for the bonded work.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed recovery against the contractor and his surety, holding that autographic-register slips created simultaneously are admissible as original writings and that production of the buyer-held counterpart is not required to satisfy the best-evidence rule.


Federal Union Surety Co. v. Indiana Lumber & Mfg. Co., 176 Ind. 328, 95 N.E. 1104 (Ind. 1911)