Experts in forensic disciplines often base their testimony on statements from experts in nonforensic areas, on knowledge common to all competent experts within a given field, on information derived from authoritative studies, and on the forensic experts' own collection of reference file data, such as that pertaining to dated typewriter specimens. Cases involving reference file information are viewed as expert testimony concerning facts by those qualified to know, and the reliability of the reference file information is seen as the most significant factor in the reliability of such testimony. Experts submitting such evidence can seek its acceptance by attempting either to establish the evidence as opinion testimony under exceptions to the hearsay rule or to establish a fact through the doctrine of judicial notice. Exceptions to the hearsay rule are often allowed in those cases wherein the hearsay is so plainly reliable as to carry confident conviction and in cases where the hearsay is not outstandingly reliable and the unconventional evidence, although not actually admitted, remains open to the scrutiny of opposing counsel and their experts. The doctrine of judicial notice is a vehicle designed to safely expedite trial procedures by relieving the party who wishes to establish a certain fact from the burden of offering formal proof of that fact. Requests for judicial notice should be made during pretrial proceedings in order to provide the opposition with an opportunity to use their own experts in verifying the fact. Such a procedure can result in the resolution of many cases without the need for a formal trial. It is recommended that verified reference file information be exchanged more often through the medium of professional literature. Examples from the field of questioned documents are provided. Footnotes are included.