Hearsay Flashcards
"He said" "She said" "I said" statements are all hearsay. Learn when they can be admitted and when they will be excluded.
Define
hearsay
Out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
Inadmissible unless an exception applies.
⭐️ Memorize this definition.
Who qualifies as a declarant for hearsay?
Must be a human being. Evidence from animals and machines are not statements (e.g. dog barking or machine printout)
What is considered a statement for hearsay purposes?
- Oral assertion;
- Written assertion; or
- Nonverbal conduct/gestures, if the person intended it as an assertion (e.g. shaking your head “yes”)
What type of statements do not constitute “offering to prove the truth of the matter asserted,” and thus are considered nonhearsay?
- Statements that have independent legal significance (e.g. tortious words, defamation, transactional words (“I accept the offer”);
- Statements to prove the state of mind of the declarant or the listener;
- Statements to show the effect on the listener (e.g. to show D saying “I’m going to kill you” frightened P);
- Statements offered solely for impeachment
⚠️ Be careful: Some statements are admissible because they are nonhearsay. Some statements are admissible because they are hearsay and qualify under an exception.
Are statements by an opposing party admissible as nonhearsay?
Yes, out-of-court statements made by a party to the litigation are always admissible as nonhearsay when offered by the opposing party.
Ex. Max is suing Ian for negligence. All of Ian’s and Max’s out-of-court statements are admissible.
What type of opposing party statements are considered nonhearsay according to the FRE?
- Judicial/personal admissions
- Adoptive admissions
-
Representative/vicarious admissions by:
- Agent/employee in scope of relationship;
- Authorized speaker; or
- Co-conspirators
What type of declarant-witness statements (that would otherwise be hearsay) are considered nonhearsay according to the FRE?
- Prior sworn inconsistent statements;
- Prior consistent statement; and
- Prior identification
⚠️ Remember: These are not hearsay exceptions. They are considered nonhearsay, or “hearsay exemptions.”
Define
judicial admission
Statement by a party in the current litigation that was either made in the pleadings, during discovery, or during trial.
Admissible as nonhearsay.
What is an adoptive admission?
Statement made by another person that the party adopts/agrees with. Two ways to adopt:
- Expressly (clear words of agreement); or
-
By silence if:
- The party heard and understood the statement and was given an opportunity to respond;
- A reasonable party would have denied/responded to the statement; and
- The party did not deny or respond
⚠️ Note: Failure to respond during a custodial interrogation after Miranda warnings does not constitute an adoptive admission.
What is a representative or authorized admission? (also called a vicarious admission)
Statement made by another that is imputed to the party, either because the party authorized it or has a special relationship with the speaker. Three types:
- Statements made by employee/agent;
- Statements made by authorized speaker; and
- Statements made by co-conspirators
When do statements made by employee/agent constitute vicarious admissions?
If the statements were:
- About matter within the scope of employer-employee relationship; and
- Made during the existence of the relationship
When are the statements of co-conspirators considered vicarious admissions?
When the statements were made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy
Name the 3 types of prior statements that are considered nonhearsay. What is required to admit them?
- Prior sworn inconsistent statements;
- Prior consistent statements; and
- Prior statements of identification
In order to be admissible, the declarant must:
- Testify at the present trial; and
- Be subject to cross-examination
⚠️ Be extremely careful about fact patterns with prior statements when the declarant is not available to testify. Unless the declarant is currently testifying, the statements will be inadmissible.
When is a prior inconsistent statement admissible as both substantive evidence AND evidence to impeach?
If:
- The declarant is available to testify and subject to cross-examination; and
- The prior inconsistent statement was a sworn statement under penalty of perjury at a prior trial, hearing, deposition, or other legal proceeding
⚠️ Note: If the statement was not made under oath, it cannot be admitted for substantive evidence. Only for impeachment purposes. This is tricky, so watch out.
When is a prior inconsistent statement only admissible to impeach? (and not as substantive evidence)
If the statement was not made under oath, it will only be allowed to impeach. If the statement was made under oath, it is admissible to impeach and as substantive evidence.
When is a prior consistent statement admissible as nonhearsay?
If:
- Declarant is a currently testifying witness and subject to cross-examination; and either:
- Statement is offered to rebut charge that declarant recently fabricated testimony or was subject to undue influence or motive; or
- Statement is to rehabilitate the declarant’s credibility as a witness when attacked on another ground
When is a prior identification admissible as nonhearsay?
Admissible as substantive evidence if:
- Declarant is a currently testifying witness and subject to cross-examination; and
- Witness identified the person prior to trial (e.g. in a lineup)
What is the hearsay exception for present sense impressions?
Statement is admissible if:
- It describes or explains an event; and
- Made during the event or immediately afterwards
Ex. “A red car is driving next to us”
What is the hearsay exception for excited utterances?
Statement is admissible if it:
- Relates to a startling event or condition; and
- Was made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused
Ex. “Oh my gosh, look, the house across the street is on fire!!”