DO NOT USE FRE 803 OR 804 TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS

For numbers 1-5: Answer these questions and write the correct answer (A/B, C or D) and your explanation for your your answer on your word or pdf document.

A. Is it a statement? AND

B. Is it offered for the truth of the statement? Or,

C. is it offered for a non hearsay use such as: to show effect on listener (notice or fear), to show the declarant's state of mind (such as motive, intent, knowledge, loony toons. etc.) or offered as a verbal act. State which ground(s) applies to the problem. Or,

D. Is it not considered hearsay because FRE 801(d) says it is not hearsay. State which subsection of rule 801(d). For example, 801(d)(2)

1. Monica's prior statement under oath to Congress offered as evidence in a subsequent trial for the truth of the prior statement under oath.

2. A prescription for bifocal lenses offered by the defense to show that the eyewitness called to testify by the plaintiff requires corrective lenses.

3. ABC Corp employs Alberto, Monica and Brad. Monica is supervised by Alberto. Monica fired Brad who she supervised. In Brad's wrongful discharge case against ABC, Brad, wants to admit into evidence Defendant Alberto's email approving Monica's decision to fire Brad

4. CEO, Don Carter's statement: "Don't question my authority for I am divined by god allowed for this." This statement will be offered at trial to have Mr. Carter committed to the state mental hospital.

5. The statement made by Uncle to his niece when he hands her a diamond tennis bracelet: "You can have this for your twenty-first birthday

or questions 6-10: chose the correct answer and transfer to your word or pdf document.

6. Plaintiff was injured by a driver for the Trucking Company. The truck driver was making a company delivery. Plaintiff sued only the Trucking Company. Plaintiff's counsel, at trial, seeks to have the sheriff who investigated the accident testify that the truck driver told the sheriff: "This probably was my fault." The judge should rule the proffered evidence:

a. Admissible as an admission of an employee of a party, concerning a matter within the scope of employment.

b. Admissible, because it is a statement made to a police officer in the course of an official investigation.

c. Inadmissible, because it is a statement by a party who has an interest in the outcome of the case.

d. Inadmissible, because it is hearsay.

7. During cross-examination of the Plaintiff's witness in an infamous savings and loan case, the defense attorney inquired about a windfall the witness would receive should the Plaintiff prevail. Upon redirect, the Plaintiff offered the witness's prior deposition wherein the witness testified similarly to his testimony during the trial. The judge should rule the evidence:

a. Admissible as a prior consistent statement by a witness.

b. Admissible as a recorded recollection.

c. Inadmissible because it is hearsay.

d. Inadmissible because the defense attorney did not cross-examine the witness at the deposition.

8. In a civil lawsuit, plaintiff deposed Witt prior to trial, with defendant's counsel present. Witt testifies differently at trial. The plaintiff now wants to offer Witt's testimony not only as impeachment, but also as substantive evidence. Should the trial judge admit the deposition as substantive evidence?

a. No, the deposition may only be admitted for impeachment purposes.

b. No, because the deposition is hearsay without an exception.

c. Yes, because substantive evidence is excluded from the hearsay rule.

d. Yes, because the deposition in this situation is considered a statement which is not hearsay and it may be admitted for the truth it asserts.

9. Pedestrian was hit at a street crossing by an automobile driven by Driver. Pedestrian's counsel calls Witness to testify that Driver pleaded with Witness to testify falsely that Pedestrian ran in front of Driver's car. The trial judge should rule Witness's testimony:

a. Admissible because Driver's statement was an excited utterance which is an exception to the hearsay rule.

b. Admissible because Driver's statement was an admission by a party opponent.

c. Inadmissible because it was hearsay.

d. Inadmissible because it was not relevant to the issue of negligence.

10. The declaration of an agent is always admissible against the principal.

T or F