During a workplace dispute, an individual sues their employer for wrongful termination, alleging discrimination. At trial, the plaintiff seeks to introduce an email written by one of the employer's managers that states, 'We need to terminate [the plaintiff] because they are raising too many concerns about workplace safety.' The employer objects to the email being admitted as evidence, arguing it is hearsay. How should the court rule on the admissibility of the email?
Not admissible, because internal communications between manager and employer are not admissible as evidence in this type of case.
Admissible, because it was a statement made by someone with authority on matters related to the plaintiff’s employment status.
Not admissible, because the email is hearsay and does not qualify under any applicable exceptions.
Admissible, because any internal communication between an employee and their employer is generally admissible in court.
The email is admissible as a statement attributable to a party-opponent, which is an exclusion from the hearsay rule under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). A statement made by an agent or employee is not hearsay when it concerns a matter within the scope of their employment and was made during the employment relationship. Here, the manager’s email directly relates to the employment relationship and the decision-making process about the plaintiff's termination. Other incorrect answers either fail to recognize the scope of the employment or incorrectly rely on the misclassification of the email as hearsay without addressing the rules governing a party-opponent's statements.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is hearsay in legal terms?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the exceptions to hearsay rules?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D) state?