HEARSAY v. NON-HEARSAY: THE FOOL-PROOF HEARSAY TEST (14-15)

QUESTION: What legal analysis should the court apply when asked to rule on the admissibility of an out-of-court statement?

ANSWER: If you have ever read “Alice in Wonderland” you would be wise to follow the King’s advice to the white rabbit and always “beBatman.hearsaygin at the beginning.” In other words, when asked to rule on the admissibility of an out-of-court statement, instead of assuming the statement is hearsay and skipping directly to the hearsay exceptions (which is what most of us do), it is usually best to take a step back, go to the beginning and ask the threshold question: is this out-of-court statement really hearsay? The answer isn’t always clear. Many statements that initially appear to be hearsay, on closer examination, actually are not. In order to make that determination I suggest you apply the following FOOL-PROOF HEARSAY TEST. 

CLICK ON LINK BELOW TO READ MORE

PendletonUpdate14-15

Advertisements

One response to “HEARSAY v. NON-HEARSAY: THE FOOL-PROOF HEARSAY TEST (14-15)

  1. Why can’t all explanations be so simple. You just dumbed it down for this old fart in law school in less than 3 minutes. Thanks!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s