So... I was listening to my BarBri home-study course... the section on Evidence, and I thought of a question, and I wanted Mr. Wondering's opinion of it, since he's already a lawyer...
HYPO -
W buys a fancy new pair of slacks advertised to be "the most sliming and attractive pants you've ever bought." W tries the pants on for H, her husband, who comments, "Those ugly pants make yer butt look HUGE!" (<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />)
After W was acquitted (by a jury consisting of a disproportionate number of generously proportioned married women) for the death of H by reason of temporary insanity, she sues the maker of the slacks for false advertising under a consumer protection statute. W's lawyer attempts to introduce H's statement, and the manufacturer's lawyer objects on the grounds of hearsay. What result? Explain.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
MY ANSWER -
Overruled. While clearly "hearsay" in that it was an out of court statement being introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted, this falls into the "statements against interest" exception. H is (1) unavailable, and (2) as W's husband, that statement was obviously a statement made against "penile interests" and therefore presumably reliable. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />
------------------------
Perhaps I've been studying too long today. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Well... Enough of that... Back to the books! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
