Also known as: hearsay within hearsay · double hearsay · multiple hearsay · hearsay on hearsay
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A rule of evidence providing that a statement containing multiple layers of out-of-court assertions is admissible only when each layer independently qualifies under a hearsay exception or exclusion.
Holly Hayes testified that a nurse told her the principal investigator reported an executive's admission about undisclosed medication risks. The executive's statement qualified as an opposing-party admission. The nurse's report to Hayes qualified as an excited utterance made while visibly upset shortly after a patient's death. Because each layer met an independent basis for admission, the combined testimony came in over objection.
Hector Huerta offered a government report that summarized statements from an external informant about a defendant's activities. The report itself fell within the public-records exception. The informant's embedded statement lacked any qualifying exception or exclusion. The court excluded the composite because the inner layer failed to satisfy the rule.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Each constituent statement must independently satisfy a hearsay exception or exclusion. The rule requires separate analysis of every layer rather than treating the composite as a single unit.
Supporting sources
The entire statement is excluded. Courts do not admit the composite when any single layer lacks an independent basis for admission under the rules.
Supporting sources
Yes. Such records are analyzed as hearsay within hearsay, and the external statements must themselves meet an exception or exclusion even if the record as a whole qualifies under another rule.
Supporting sources
If any layer is offered for its truth, that layer must still qualify under an exception or exclusion. A non-hearsay purpose for one statement does not excuse a hearsay layer offered for its truth.
Supporting sources
…rule, it should be. He feels that is mandated by Rules 805 and 403. Rule 805 recites, in effect, that a statement containing hearsay within hearsay is admissible if each part of the statement falls within an exception to the hearsay rule. Rule 805, however, deals only with hearsay exceptions. A statement based on the personal knowledge…