In an action by the plaintiff against the defendant, one of the issues is whether the defendant is a licensed physical therapist. Normally, the names of all licensed physical therapists are registered with the office of the state Department of Professional Registrations. The plaintiff wishes to introduce a certified document, signed by the chief registrar of the department (who cannot be located), stating that an examination of the department's rolls does not disclose the defendant's name. Should the document be admitted

Yes, because a statement of absence from public record is admissible

Explanation:

Evidence according to the Rules of Court

This simply implies legal by law and used in ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, especially the truth in relation to a matter of fact. The scope of evidence is usually the same in all courts and all trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or these rules.

An evidence is admissible only if it is important or relevant to the issue at hand and is not excluded by the law.

The said document presented by the plaintiff should be admitted. When viewed in relation to the exception to the hearsay rule for public records and other official writings, it is stated in the Federal Rule of Evidence 803(10) that given that an evidence in the form of a certification or testimony from the custodian of public records that she has diligently searched and failed to find a record is admissible to prove that a matter was not recorded, or, inferentially, that a matter did not occur. Here, the defendant's status as a licensed physical therapist would normally be revealed in the records of the department. The document here at issue is admissible as a means of proving that the defendant is in fact not licensed.

limited access to education

bro these r easy u may have to do them urself bro. lol jk the answer is two for nimber one, and for question number two sahel boi xd have fun get rekt m8