The Online Asbestos, Asbestos Cancer, & Mesothelioma Authority
Judicial Notice
This is a legal term that refers to a rule of evidence allowing a well-known, irrefutable fact to be introduced into evidence, which a judge may allow in the absence of any supporting testimony. Typically, this is at the request of the party that wishes to have the fact determined by the court.
For example, a plaintiff who is suing an insurance company for losses incurred during one of California's "rolling blackouts" in 2001 could say that on 17 January of that year, his facility lost power for two hours - long enough to cause the damage in question. Since rolling blackouts on that date are a matter of public record, there would be no need to have witnesses in order to verify the story.
As an attorney for the defense in the 1858 case of Illinois v. Armstrong, Abraham Lincoln used judicial notice to refute a prosecution witness' testimony that he had seen the defendant murder his victim by the light of the moon directly overhead. Introducing an almanac into evidence, Lincoln was able to demonstrate that at the time and date of the murder, the moon had actually been just above the horizon.
According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, "...A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned" (FRE Rule 201b). In other words, evidence taken under judicial notice must either consist of facts well-known to people in the jurisdiction, or can be readily verified by consulting a reliable source (such as a public record).
In addition, judicial notice is considered permissive - meaning the court can accept or reject the evidence and require supporting testimony - or mandatory - in which case the court must accept it. In general, the latter category consists of government and other official documents.