§Why CasetextPricing

M.C. v. Pactiv Corporation, et al (Lead Case)

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION Motion to Allow Filing of Video Recorded Statements, 253 MOTION Motion to Determine Admissibility of Recorded Statement of Decedent Melanie Chambers

5 Cited authorities

  1. U.S. v. Cardascia

    951 F.2d 474 (2d Cir. 1991)   Cited 238 times
    Holding a resignation letter to be inadmissible hearsay because, "[u]nlike a legally operative statement . . . [it's] significance does not lie solely in the fact that it was made[, but rather] the letter was sought to be introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted, that is, Martorelli resigned as assistant vice-president of the bank. . . ."

  2. Shepard v. United States

    290 U.S. 96 (1933)   Cited 415 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that hearsay testimony regarding the declarant's intended future acts or present state of mind is admissible

  3. U.S. v. Joe

    8 F.3d 1488 (10th Cir. 1993)   Cited 131 times
    Holding doctor's testimony admissible under Federal Evidence Rule 803 where "the identity of the sexual assailant was important for his recommendation regarding Ms. Joe's after-care, including appropriate counseling"

  4. Fomby v. Popwell

    695 So. 2d 628 (Ala. Civ. App. 1997)   Cited 3 times
    Affirming a trial court's refusal to admit certain witness statements under Rule 803, observing: "Baker could have testified as to Fomby's statements that reflected Fomby's mental anguish. However, it appears that Baker was instead attempting to testify as to the cause of Fomby's mental anguish."

  5. Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 803   Cited 12,664 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities