The Basis Hearsay Conundrum: More on 'State v. Floyd Y.'

, New York Law Journal


In his Matrimonial Practice column, Timothy M. Tippins writes: When an expert relies upon out-of-court statements derived from interviews or from the review of documents, the evidentiary doctrine of expert testimony intersects directly with the core evidentiary principle forbidding hearsay evidence. The Court of Appeals recently confronted this Gordian knot of evidence law; the resulting split decisions underscore both the convolution of the "basis hearsay" issue and the futility of efforts to resolve the central conundrum that it presents.

This content has been archived.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Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.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

What's being said

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

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202655098578

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.