Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

hearsay rule

Read a random definition: Federal Land Policy and Management Act

A quick definition of hearsay rule:

The hearsay rule is a rule that says you can't use someone's words or statements that they said outside of court as evidence in court. This is because the other side can't ask the person who said those things any questions to make sure they are true. There are some exceptions to this rule, like if someone said something right when it happened or if it's a record of a business. But in general, you can't use hearsay as evidence in court.

A more thorough explanation:

The hearsay rule is a legal rule that says you can't use statements made outside of court as evidence in court. This is because the person who made the statement isn't there to be questioned about it.

For example, if someone says "I saw John steal the money" outside of court, that statement would be hearsay if someone tried to use it as evidence in court. This is because the person who made the statement isn't there to be questioned about what they saw.

However, there are some exceptions to the hearsay rule. For example, if someone makes a statement about their current state of mind, like "I'm feeling really scared right now," that statement might be allowed in court because it's not being used to prove something that happened in the past.

Another exception is the business records exception. This means that records kept by a business, like receipts or invoices, might be allowed in court even if the person who made the record isn't there to testify about it.

It's important to follow the hearsay rule because it helps ensure that evidence presented in court is reliable and can be questioned by both sides.

hearsay | heat of passion

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.