Admissibility of Business Records Containing Out-of-Court Statements

, New York Law Journal


In his Evidence column, Michael J. Hutter writes: Court of Appeals Judge Stein's conclusion, and her analysis in support, that the Sprint subscriber information offered in a burglary and robbery trial to establish phone calls between the defendant and an accomplice was not barred by the hearsay rule is certainly valuable on that difficult issue. The true value of her opinion, however, lies in how she reached that admissibility conclusion in the context of the offered evidence, the cell phone records, which involved two out-of-court statements.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202778179710

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.