What is a hearsay objection?
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, hearsay is a statement that the speaker did not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing and that a party offers to prove the truth of what the statement asserts. Federal Rule 802 generally excludes hearsay unless another rule, federal statute, or Supreme Court rule provides otherwise.
That definition has two important parts: where the statement was made and why it is being offered. A repeated statement is not automatically hearsay, and a statement that fits the definition may still fall within an exclusion or exception. State evidence rules may differ.
Why the rule focuses on testing a statement
Live testimony can be tested through an oath, questions, cross-examination, and observation of the witness. When a witness repeats another person’s statement for its truth, the original speaker may not be present for that testing. The hearsay rules address that problem while recognizing categories in which other safeguards or circumstances may justify admission.
“My neighbor told me the other driver ran the red light.”
If offered to prove the driver ran the light, this matches the basic federal hearsay pattern. The same words might be offered for a different purpose, which can change the analysis.
Not everything repeated is hearsay
Federal Rule 801 defines hearsay by the purpose for which a statement is offered. A statement may be relevant because it was heard, because it gave notice, or because saying the words had legal significance. In those settings, the statement may not be offered to prove that its factual assertion was true.
- Effect on the listener. A warning may help explain a later action, apart from whether the warning was correct.
- Notice or warning. Evidence that someone was told about a hazard may show they knew about it, regardless of whether the warning was accurate.
- Words with legal significance. Some words matter because they were spoken, such as words of offer, acceptance, or notice, rather than because the words describe a true fact.
Exclusions and exceptions
Federal Rule 801 identifies certain statements as “not hearsay” when its requirements are met. One familiar category is a statement made by an opposing party and offered against that party. Federal Rules 803 and 804 also list exceptions with specific requirements. Common labels include:
- An opposing party’s statement. Under the federal rules, qualifying statements in this category are defined as “not hearsay.”
- Excited utterance. A statement blurted out under the stress of a startling event.
- Present sense impression. A statement describing an event as it happens or immediately after.
- Business records. Records kept in the ordinary course of business, if a foundation is laid.
The labels are only a starting point. Each category has requirements, and other rules may still affect admissibility. This page does not apply an exception to a reader’s message, record, or conversation.
A recognition checklist for the vocabulary
- What statement is being identified?
- Who made it?
- Was it made while that person was testifying at the current trial or hearing?
- For what purpose is it being offered?
- Does another rule exclude it from the definition or provide an exception?
Those questions describe the structure of the federal rule. They do not determine the answer in a real case. A relevance question can overlap with hearsay because the purpose for offering the statement matters. See the relevance explainer.
What the judge may say next
A hearsay objection may be sustained, overruled, or followed by questions about the purpose of the statement or a claimed exception. See what “sustained” and “overruled” mean.