## Facts

- U.S. electronics manufacturers Zenith Radio Corp. and National Union Electric Corp. sued numerous Japanese manufacturers and trading companies, alleging a long-running conspiracy to injure U.S. competitors in consumer electronics.
- Plaintiffs alleged coordinated predatory export pricing in the United States, coupled with supracompetitive pricing in Japan to recoup losses, and other coordinated restraints (including export price-fixing and market allocation).
- The actions were consolidated in multidistrict litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
- Plaintiffs sought to prove the alleged conspiracy largely through evidence generated in Japan, including:
  - Transcripts of testimony by executives before the Japanese Fair Trade Commission (JFTC).
  - Materials associated with the JFTC investigation, such as diaries, minutes, and internal memoranda.
- The opinion addressed pretrial evidentiary disputes regarding whether these foreign materials could be admitted at a U.S. antitrust trial under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

## Issues

1. Whether JFTC testimony transcripts were admissible, including under the former-testimony and public-records exceptions to the hearsay rule.
2. Whether diaries, minutes, and similar documents connected to the JFTC proceedings were admissible as business records, party-opponent admissions, or under other evidentiary theories.
3. Whether, and to what extent, such statements and documents could be used against defendants other than the entity or individual directly connected to the statement or document.

## Decision

- The court largely excluded the JFTC testimony as inadmissible hearsay and rejected plaintiffs’ reliance on key hearsay exceptions.
- The court held the JFTC transcripts did not qualify as former testimony because the relevant parties lacked a comparable opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony in the JFTC setting.
- The court rejected treating most underlying JFTC testimony as admissible public records, distinguishing official governmental findings from collected witness statements.
- The court limited admission of diaries and similar materials, finding many did not satisfy the foundational and trustworthiness requirements for the business-records exception.
- The court declined to permit broad use of particular statements against all defendants, requiring appropriate showings for attribution, agency, or co-conspirator use.

## Legal Principles

- Former testimony is admissible only when the opposing party had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony in the prior proceeding; procedural differences that materially limit adversarial testing weigh against admissibility.
- The public-records exception may cover certain official governmental findings, but it does not automatically admit underlying witness statements gathered during an investigation.
- The business-records exception requires proof that the record was made at or near the time, kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity, made as a regular practice, and is sufficiently trustworthy; personal diaries or informal notes often fail this showing.
- Party-opponent admissions and co-conspirator statements are not automatically usable against other parties; extension to other defendants requires proper foundations for agency, conspiracy membership, and admissibility limits.

## Conclusion

The court’s evidentiary rulings sharply restricted plaintiffs’ ability to rely on JFTC transcripts and related Japanese materials, applying strict hearsay and foundation requirements and limiting cross-defendant use of statements in complex, multi-party antitrust litigation.


Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 505 F. Supp. 1190 (E.D. Pa. 1980)