Short answer. Yes — make a tender of excluded evidence. Rule 132, Section 40 lets the offeror attach excluded documents or things to the record, and if the excluded evidence is oral, lets the offeror state for the record the witness's identity and the substance of the proposed testimony, preserving the point for review.
What the law says
If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony.
Rule 132, Section 40 — Tender of excluded evidence. Read the full provision →
Why an appellate court needs more than just a ruling
When a trial court excludes evidence, the record ordinarily shows only that the objection was sustained and the evidence kept out — it does not, on its own, show an appellate court what that evidence actually would have said or looked like. Without knowing the substance of what was excluded, a reviewing court cannot meaningfully assess whether the exclusion was wrong, or whether an erroneous exclusion actually mattered to the outcome. Section 40 exists to close that gap by giving the offering party a mechanism to put the actual content of the excluded evidence on record at the time of the ruling.
How the tender works for documents versus testimony
For documents or physical things, the mechanism is straightforward: the offeror may have the excluded item attached to or made part of the record, so the actual exhibit itself — not just a description of it — is preserved for later review. For oral evidence, where there is no physical object to attach, the offeror instead states for the record the name and personal circumstances of the witness along with the substance of what that witness's testimony would have been, giving the appellate court a concrete basis to evaluate the excluded testimony's likely content and relevance.
Why skipping this step can be fatal on appeal
A party that simply lets an adverse exclusion ruling stand, without making this record, often finds the issue effectively unreviewable later — an appellate court has nothing concrete to evaluate and no way to judge whether the exclusion actually prejudiced the outcome. Making the tender promptly, right when the ruling is made, is the practical safeguard: it costs little at trial, keeps the objection meaningful rather than symbolic, and is often what separates an exclusion ruling that can genuinely be challenged on appeal from one that, however wrong, simply cannot be reviewed for lack of any record to examine.