Also known as: multiple-hearsay · double hearsay · hearsay within hearsay · compound hearsay
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A hearsay statement containing one or more embedded hearsay statements. Each layer must independently satisfy a hearsay exception or exclusion for the composite statement to be admissible.
Everett called neighbor Charles to recount what the insurance adjuster had told him about the fire chief's opinion. Charles testified that the adjuster relayed the investigator's report of the chief's statement that the fire appeared intentionally set. Each speaker's statement fit a separate exception such as present sense impression or business record, so the court allowed the full chain into evidence.
Marcus Reed offered an internal investigator's deposition that summarized statements from other guards about disciplinary files. The court admitted only the portions where each embedded statement independently qualified under an exception or exclusion. The remaining layers were excluded because they lacked any qualifying ground.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
No. The rule permits the evidence once each separate statement satisfies its own exception. Treating nested statements as automatically fatal would contradict the provision allowing combined statements when every component qualifies.
Supporting sources
No. Each layer may rest on its own independent ground such as present sense impression, business record, excited utterance, or party admission. The rule requires only that every layer qualify separately.
Supporting sources
The entire composite statement is excluded. The rule demands conformity at every level because each layer must carry its own guarantee of trustworthiness.
Supporting sources
Yes. If the proponent offers the testimony solely to show the content of assurances or the fact that statements were made rather than their truth, the hearsay rule does not apply and the multiple-layers analysis is unnecessary.
Supporting sources
…rule, it should be. He feels that is mandated by Rules 805 and 403. Rule 805 recites, in effect, that a statement containing hearsay within hearsay is admissible if each part of the statement falls within an exception to the hearsay rule. Rule 805, however, deals only with hearsay exceptions. A statement based on the personal knowledge…