In Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon, the Supreme Court rendered a famous and controversial judgement concerning the admissibility of a person’s out-of-court statement. Rule 803(3) of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with the famous Hillmon case, but it restricts its applicability. In Hillmon, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed evidence of person A’s statement of his intention to travel and, here is the controversial part, with person B. Perhaps, that was too broad an exception to the hearsay rule, which requires a judge to focus on reliable evidence. Consequently, by passing the Rule 803(3) hearsay exception, Congress restricted the use of such a statement to allow only for person A’s statement of intention as to what person A will do. That seems to make the most sense. After all, using person A’s reference to person B as evidence that the two men did actually travel together seems problematic. For example, Person B could have decided to part company with Person A immediately after the statement was  made, or perhaps the two men never met to begin with and/or the statement was fabricated.     

We are left with an eminently sensitive rule: a statement of a person’s own intention is admissible but not as to another person’s and, in no event, is a statement of memory or belief admissible. A statement of a memory or belief could be fabricated to cover up a crime or to get someone off the hook from civil liability. Certainly, a statement of intention can be deliberately misleading, but cross-examination may take care of that. Besides, a statement of intention is not determinative that the act actually happened; it is only an exception to the hearsay rule from which the trier of fact may infer that the intended act did take place. In other words, that statement of intention will advance the football but on its own will not get you into the endzone.

View Attorney Profile

Robert I. Feinberg

Licensed since 1982

Member at firm Feinberg & Alban, P.C.

AWARDS

AV Preeminent

RECENT POSTS

  • Jury Impanelment (Cont.)
    Posted on November 28, 2012
    Topic: Litigation

    Most trial attorneys and judges will tell you that you can never predict the way that jurors will interpret a case.  Further, because the secrecy of jury deliberations is so closely guarded, none of us can really know what specifically influenced the jurors.  The judges talk to the jurors after the verdict in the jury ... Read more

  • Civil Litigators… In the Beginning
    Posted on November 20, 2012
    Topic: Civil Litigation

    Having employed law students and new lawyers for almost thirty years, I find their perceptions worth sharing for what it says about the practice of law as opposed to their expectations. At the outset, let me point out that these are talented and earnest people.  In general, civil litigation is not what they expected after ... Read more

  • Civil Litigators… In the Beginning (Cont.)
    Posted on November 8, 2012
    Topic: Personal Injury

    New lawyers are equipped with legal research and writing skill. The question becomes, however, how does that translate into writing the memoranda or other document in the real life world of advocacy? Something like an offer of proof for court, a brief in the discovery process, or certainly a demand letter to a tortfeasor’s insurer ... Read more

Robert I. Feinberg

Licensed since 1982

Member at firm Feinberg & Alban, P.C.

AWARDS

AV Preeminent

RECENT POSTS

  • Jury Impanelment (Cont.)
    Posted on November 28, 2012
    Topic: Litigation

    Most trial attorneys and judges will tell you that you can never predict the way that jurors will interpret a case.  Further, because the secrecy of jury deliberations is so closely guarded, none of us can really know what specifically influenced the jurors.  The judges talk to the jurors after the verdict in the jury ... Read more

  • Civil Litigators… In the Beginning
    Posted on November 20, 2012
    Topic: Civil Litigation

    Having employed law students and new lawyers for almost thirty years, I find their perceptions worth sharing for what it says about the practice of law as opposed to their expectations. At the outset, let me point out that these are talented and earnest people.  In general, civil litigation is not what they expected after ... Read more

  • Civil Litigators… In the Beginning (Cont.)
    Posted on November 8, 2012
    Topic: Personal Injury

    New lawyers are equipped with legal research and writing skill. The question becomes, however, how does that translate into writing the memoranda or other document in the real life world of advocacy? Something like an offer of proof for court, a brief in the discovery process, or certainly a demand letter to a tortfeasor’s insurer ... Read more