Documents had to address the actual dispute
Justice Caloras checked what each document actually proved. A dog registry did not conclusively show who had the better right to possess the dog. The accessibility audit covered a different website. The air-cannon study examined a different distance. Presenting a document did not solve those mismatches.
Preparation point
Show that the document supports the specific point you need to prove.
How it played outSituation, action, outcome
- The situation
- A party offered a document as decisive proof.
- What he did
- He checked its subject and the conditions it covered.
- What made a difference
- The document’s form did not fix the mismatch.
In his words2 quotes
“the compliance audit that was submitted to the court is for a website called "genopalate.com," not the defendant’s website.”
Batista v PhotonLight.com, Inc., at *6. On the audit of a different website.
“Participation in approximately 20 t-shirt tosses does not a qualified witness make”
Swanson v Queens Ball Park Co., LLC, at *5. On estimating the launch angle from about 47 feet away.
In the cited cases3 rulings
Shallo: registry, license, and payment records did not conclusively establish who had the better right to possess the dog.
Batista: an audit of a different website did not show that the defendant’s site had been fixed.
Swanson: a study of impacts from less than a meter away did not address the stadium launch.