During a wrongful death lawsuit, the plaintiff seeks to admit a transcript of deposition testimony given by a witness from a related civil trial involving the same facts. The witness is now incapacitated and cannot testify in court. The defendant objects to the admission of the deposition, claiming it is hearsay. Under what circumstances is the deposition testimony admissible?
If the judge admits the deposition testimony after determining it is relevant and appropriate to resolve key issues in the case.
If the deposition testimony is related to the same general facts as the lawsuit but cross-examination did not take place during the prior proceeding.
If the plaintiff emphasizes the deposition’s importance and the defendant’s objection is based on procedural grounds.
If the defendant had the opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine the witness during the prior proceeding.
Deposition testimony becomes admissible under the hearsay exception for former testimony only if the party against whom it is offered had the opportunity and a similar motive to cross-examine the witness during the prior proceeding. This ensures that the testimony meets the reliability required under evidence rules. The incorrect options fail because they omit or misstate key legal criteria: related facts are not enough by themselves without cross-examination, procedural objections do not control admissibility, and the relevance or importance of testimony cannot override the legal requirements for prior testimony.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is hearsay and why is it significant in court?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does 'opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine' mean?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are some other exceptions to the hearsay rule?