Also known as: party-opponent statement · party-opponent statements · party opponent admission · party opponent admissions · admission by party-opponent · admissions by party-opponent · admissions · party admissions · opposing party statements
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A category of out-of-court statements offered against an opposing party that made or adopted them. Such statements are treated as non-hearsay under the Federal Rules of Evidence when offered against that opposing party.
Paige Porter sued Pulse Media for breach after the company terminated her contract. In its summary judgment motion, Pulse Media cited Paige's deposition admission that she had missed two deadlines. The court treated the admission as non-hearsay and granted partial summary judgment on liability.
Penelope Price challenged a university admissions policy in federal court. After she graduated, the university moved to dismiss, citing her deposition statement that she no longer sought admission. The court accepted the party-opponent statement as establishing mootness.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pablo Perez applied for bar admission and failed to disclose a prior disciplinary matter on his application. The admissions authority introduced his own statements from the application process as party-opponent admissions to support denial.
Prime Logistics sued Progressive Healthcare over delayed shipments. At the pretrial conference, Progressive's counsel admitted on the record that certain delivery logs were accurate. The court used the admission to narrow issues for trial.
Piper Patel sued a public university after her application was denied under a points-based admissions system. The university introduced her own prior statements acknowledging the policy's mechanical operation as party-opponent admissions supporting its defense.
Pamela Phillips challenged a law school's admissions decision that considered race as one factor among many. The school offered her deposition statements praising the individualized process as party-opponent admissions to defend the policy.
Party-opponent statements are treated as non-hearsay when offered against the party who made them. They require no showing of unavailability or other foundational elements required for exceptions like former testimony.
Supporting sources
Statements made during compromise negotiations are generally protected under Rule 408 when offered to prove liability. Party-opponent statements remain admissible when offered for another purpose such as bias or when they fall outside the negotiation context.
Supporting sources
Statements by an authorized agent or employee made within the scope of employment are admissible against the principal as party-opponent statements. Statements made only to the principal or another agent are not.
Supporting sources
The proponent must show that the statement was made by the opposing party or its agent and that it is offered against that party. No additional reliability finding is required.
Supporting sources
…and effective warning of his rights at the outset of the interrogation process. In all the cases, the questioning elicited oral admissions, and in three of them, signed statements as well which were admitted at their trials. They all thus share salient features—incommunicado interrogation of individuals in a police-dominated…