Which category is the statement by a party's agent or servant within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship?

Which category is the statement by a party's agent or servant within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship?

• A. 801(D)(2)(d)
• B. 801(D)(1)(c)
• C. 801(D)(2)(a)
• D. 801(D)(1)(b)

Answer: (A)

Not hearsay—admission by an agent or employee. When a party’s agent or servant makes a statement about a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, and that statement is made while the relationship exists, it is treated as an admission of the party opponent. The reason is that the agent is acting on behalf of the party and within the duties of that role, so what the agent says is effectively attributable to the party itself. This allows the party to be bound by statements made in the normal course of the relationship, even though the speaker is not the party personally. For example, if a manager says, “We approved the shipment,” that statement can be used against the company because it reflect the company’s position within the scope of the manager’s authority and during the time the employment relationship existed. If the statement were made after the relationship ended or about something outside the scope of the agent’s duties, it would not fit this category.

Not hearsay—admission by an agent or employee. When a party’s agent or servant makes a statement about a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, and that statement is made while the relationship exists, it is treated as an admission of the party opponent. The reason is that the agent is acting on behalf of the party and within the duties of that role, so what the agent says is effectively attributable to the party itself. This allows the party to be bound by statements made in the normal course of the relationship, even though the speaker is not the party personally. For example, if a manager says, “We approved the shipment,” that statement can be used against the company because it reflect the company’s position within the scope of the manager’s authority and during the time the employment relationship existed. If the statement were made after the relationship ended or about something outside the scope of the agent’s duties, it would not fit this category.