The main partner in their Entertainment Law group went to CLS, but he was Fiske and on LR, so be careful. You don't want to set yourself goals that are too high.
Q - P falls off escalator at store. sues D, owner of store. P seeks to have W, who was at store, testify that she overheard heard jim tell sally that he overheard bill tell D the elevator was acting up.A - bar review book answer says it's not hearsay b/c it's not being asserted for the truth of the matter, i.e. that the elevator was acting up - instead it is being introduced to show that D had notice.BUT - isn't it also being introduced for the truth that jim asserted to sally that he overheard bill tell D?in that case, it would be hearsay, right?
This is not a multiple hearsay problem because it doesn't involve hearsay.
She could also possibly (depending on the proclivities of the judge) testify that X has a gravestone that says his date of death is April 30, 1999- not to show that he actually died then but that the gravestone says he did.
Quote This is not a multiple hearsay problem because it doesn't involve hearsay. You are right that it wouldn't be hearsay if not used for the forbidden purpose but 403 allows the judge to exclude anything he/she finds unduly prejudicial. The he said that he said stuff might fit that bill regardless of whether it's actually being used as hearsay.
Get a sense of humor, Susan B. Anthony!
I'm going to cut a female dog. With a knife with a brown handle, natch.
Don't judge me. You've not had my life.