The plaintiff's testimony is admissible because plaintiff as personal knowledge of the statement of a party-opponent.
The recording is coincidental with firsthand knowledge. The person could testify based upon firsthand knowledge and could also lay the foundation under Article 9 to authenticate the tape.
In this case, the tape is not required as a matter of the original writing rule, giving the proponent options to offer testimony from memory, and/or the opportunity to corroborate the in-court testimony by a demonstrative exhibit
Learn more about testimony on:
https://brainly.com/question/26788566
#SPJ1