How does FRE treat a party opponent's statements?

How does FRE treat a party opponent's statements?

• A. They are hearsay and inadmissible.
• B. They are not hearsay but may be admitted only for impeachment.
• C. They are admissible only for impeachment.
• D. They are not hearsay and may be admissible as substantive evidence.

Answer: (D)

Under the Federal Rules, statements by a party opponent are not hearsay. Rule 801(d)(2) treats those statements as admissions by a party and they may be offered against the party as substantive evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. This means a party’s own words can be used to prove the fact asserted, just like direct evidence, not only to impeach. For example, if the defendant says, “I did it,” that statement can be admitted as substantive evidence against the defendant. The rule is not limited to impeachment; it allows substantive use as well, unlike options that would confine them to impeachment or render them inadmissible. In short, party-opponent statements are not hearsay and may be admissible as substantive evidence.

Under the Federal Rules, statements by a party opponent are not hearsay. Rule 801(d)(2) treats those statements as admissions by a party and they may be offered against the party as substantive evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. This means a party’s own words can be used to prove the fact asserted, just like direct evidence, not only to impeach. For example, if the defendant says, “I did it,” that statement can be admitted as substantive evidence against the defendant. The rule is not limited to impeachment; it allows substantive use as well, unlike options that would confine them to impeachment or render them inadmissible. In short, party-opponent statements are not hearsay and may be admissible as substantive evidence.