Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
14. The resident's statement, reported by the tenant, is
A plaintiff sued a defendant for injuries received when she fell down a stairway in the defendant's apartment building. The plaintiff, a guest in the building, alleged that she caught the heel of her shoe in a tear in the stair carpet. The plaintiff calls a tenant to testify that another resident had said to the tenant a week before the plaintiff's fall: «When I paid my rent this morning, I told the manager he had better fix that torn carpet.»
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
An out-of-court statement offered for a purpose other than to prove the truth of the matter asserted will not be considered hearsay. One such purpose is to show the effect on the listener. In a negligence case, a statement of warning may be admissible for the limited purpose of showing notice on the part of the listener.
D is correct. The question asks if the statement made by the resident to the tenant, which contains another statement by the resident to the manager, is admissible. The issue, then, is whether these two separate statements are hearsay, and if so, do they fall within any applicable exception? First, as to the statement the resident made to the manager, it was made out-of-court, but it may be admissible as being offered to show the effect on the listener: that the defendant had notice of the need to fix the carpet. Even if this statement is admissible, however, the other statement the resident made to the tenant must also be admissible. This second statement is not being offered to show the effect on the listener, who was the tenant (not the defendant) and does not fit within any other applicable exception to the hearsay rule. Because multiple hearsay requires that every individual hearsay statement is admissible separately, the testimony is inadmissible.
A is incorrect. When out-of-court statements, such as the two contained within the proffered testimony, are being offered as substantive evidence of the truth of the matter asserted, there must be applicable exceptions to the hearsay rule for them to be admissible. This answer choice states that the testimony is admissible for the truth of the matter asserted: to prove that the carpet was defective. Neither statement falls within an applicable exception.
B is incorrect. Although the resident's statement to the manager may have been admissible to show the effect on the manager of notice of the condition, the resident's statement to the tenant is inadmissible because the listener is the tenant. The tenant having notice of the tear in the carpet does not affect the defendant's liability. Therefore, the tenant's testimony, containing hearsay not within any exception, is inadmissible.
C is incorrect. As explained above, the tenant's testimony is inadmissible. The testimony contains a hearsay statement (by the resident to the tenant) that cannot be offered for the truth of the matter asserted: that the carpet was defective. Nor can it be offered to show the effect on the listener because, in this statement, the listener was the tenant.