Search Site
Menu

Statements of Intent

In Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hillmon, the Supreme Court rendered a famous and controversial judgement concerning the admissibility of a person’s out-of-court statement. Rule 803(3) of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with the famous Hillmon case, but it restricts its applicability. In Hillmon, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed evidence of person A’s statement of his intention to travel and, here is the controversial part, with person B. Perhaps, that was too broad an exception to the hearsay rule, which requires a judge to focus on reliable evidence. Consequently, by passing the Rule 803(3) hearsay exception, Congress restricted the use of such a statement to allow only for person A’s statement of intention as to what person A will do. That seems to make the most sense. After all, using person A’s reference to person B as evidence that the two men did actually travel together seems problematic. For example, Person B could have decided to part company with Person A immediately after the statement was made, or perhaps the two men never met to begin with and/or the statement was fabricated.

We are left with an eminently sensitive rule: a statement of a person’s own intention is admissible but not as to another person’s and, in no event, is a statement of memory or belief admissible. A statement of a memory or belief could be fabricated to cover up a crime or to get someone off the hook from civil liability. Certainly, a statement of intention can be deliberately misleading, but cross-examination may take care of that. Besides, a statement of intention is not determinative that the act actually happened; it is only an exception to the hearsay rule from which the trier of fact may infer that the intended act did take place. In other words, that statement of intention will advance the football but on its own will not get you into the endzone.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feinberg & Alban, P.C. fervently protects your rights
  • The Boston firm of Feinberg & Alban, P.C. specializes its practice in the area of personal injury.

    The attorneys serve the entire state of Massachusetts in addition to affiliating with lawyers in other states to handle cases outside of Massachusetts.

  • $7.7 Million Award for Feinberg & Alban Client in Personal Injury Trial

    Boston Attorneys Win Highest Injury Verdict in Massachusetts in 2011 & 2012.

Client Reviews
  • google
    5.0/5.0

    It was a pleasure working with attorney Alexis Cahill. She helped me understand everything and gave me more than I ever thought. She is so nice and an excellent lawyer. I'm glad I went to this co-op.” thank again you for taking care of everyth...

    Read more

    rita botelho

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Colleen Santora and her partners at Feinberg & Alban went above and beyond in providing efficient and professional representation throughout my recovery process. Colleen is a great attorney that is very knowledgeable and empathetic. She was a pleasur...

    Read more

    ELI-RAN YOUSHAEI

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Working with this firm was a great experience. Marsha Alban is a great attorney and very easy to work with!

    Read more

    Bronislava Abramova

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    This attorney office is highly efficient, amazing, and professional. They made me feel very comfortable and was invested in my interest. Communication through my whole experience was always professional and prompt. I highly recommend them to anyone w...

    Read more

    Babydoll Babydoll

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I was in a car accident recently, and was lost in the process of what to do post my injuries. I contacted Feinberg & Alban, where I was introduced to Colleen Santora, who was the best resource I could have ever imagined. Colleen was knowledgable, emp...

    Read more

    OT Tips & Tricks for Kids

See all reviews
Awards & Affiliations
Contact us

Quick Contact Form