Which scenario illustrates a non-hearsay under FRE 801(d)(2) when offered against the party?

Which scenario illustrates a non-hearsay under FRE 801(d)(2) when offered against the party?

• A. A statement by a party opponent offered against that party for purposes of truth.
• B. A statement by a non-party offered against a party for truth.
• C. A statement by a party opponent offered against that party for impeachment only.
• D. A statement by a non-party offered for impeachment.

Answer: (A)

Under FRE 801(d)(2), a statement made by a party and offered against that party is not hearsay. It’s an admission by the party opponent, admissible to prove the truth of the matter asserted or for any permissible purpose. This is the classic example of a nonhearsay because the proponent is relying on the party’s own statement as evidence against that party. The scenario with a party-opponent statement offered against that party for truth fits this rule exactly: it demonstrates nonhearsay because the statement is from the opposing party and is being used to prove the asserted facts. The other scenarios fail to illustrate this principle as cleanly. A non-party statement offered against a party for truth is hearsay unless some other exception applies. A party-opponent statement offered against that party for impeachment (even though it can be used for impeachment) isn’t the straightforward truth-use demonstration of 801(d)(2), and a statement by a non-party offered for impeachment isn’t covered by 801(d)(2) at all.

Under FRE 801(d)(2), a statement made by a party and offered against that party is not hearsay. It’s an admission by the party opponent, admissible to prove the truth of the matter asserted or for any permissible purpose. This is the classic example of a nonhearsay because the proponent is relying on the party’s own statement as evidence against that party.

The scenario with a party-opponent statement offered against that party for truth fits this rule exactly: it demonstrates nonhearsay because the statement is from the opposing party and is being used to prove the asserted facts.

The other scenarios fail to illustrate this principle as cleanly. A non-party statement offered against a party for truth is hearsay unless some other exception applies. A party-opponent statement offered against that party for impeachment (even though it can be used for impeachment) isn’t the straightforward truth-use demonstration of 801(d)(2), and a statement by a non-party offered for impeachment isn’t covered by 801(d)(2) at all.