Post sued Dint for dissolution of their yearlong partnership. One issue concerned the amount of money Post had received in cash. amount of money Post had received in cash. It was customary for Dint to give Post money from the cash register as Post needed it for personal expenses. Post testified that, as he received money, he jotted down the amounts in the partnership ledger. Although Dint had access to the ledger, he made no changes in it. The ledger was admitted into evidence. Dint seeks to testify to his memory of much larger amounts he had given Post. Dint's testimony is 
admissible, because it is based on Dint's firsthand knowledge.  admissible, because the ledger entries offered by a party opponent opened the door.  inadmissible, because the ledger is the best evidence of the amounts Post received.  inadmissible, because Dint's failure to challenge the accuracy of the ledger constituted an adoptive admission. 
Question: Post sued Dint for dissolution of their yearlong partnership. One issue concerned the amount of money Post had received in cash. amount of money Post had received in cash. It was customary for Dint to give Post money from the cash register as Post needed it for personal expenses. Post testified that, as he received money, he jotted down the amounts in the partnership ledger. Although Dint had access to the ledger, he made no changes in it. The ledger was admitted into evidence. Dint seeks to testify to his memory of much larger amounts he had given Post. Dint's testimony is 
A. admissible, because it is based on Dint's firsthand knowledge. 
B. admissible, because the ledger entries offered by a party opponent opened the door. 
C. inadmissible, because the ledger is the best evidence of the amounts Post received. 
D. inadmissible, because Dint's failure to challenge the accuracy of the ledger constituted an adoptive admission. 
Answer: