Turbyfill v. International Harvester Co.
486 F. Supp. 232 (1980)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A statement from a deceased declarant, though hearsay, may be admissible under the residual exception (FRE 804(b)(5)) if it possesses equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is offered as evidence of a material fact, is more probative than other reasonably procurable evidence, and its admission serves the interests of justice.
Facts:
- Plaintiff and two companions visited Defendant's used car lot to purchase a truck.
- The truck would not start, so Defendant's mechanic, Oakley Anderson, attempted to help them.
- Plaintiff poured gasoline from a small can into the truck's carburetor while one of his companions tried to start the engine.
- The engine backfired, igniting the gasoline can Plaintiff was holding and causing him severe burns.
- On the afternoon of the accident, Anderson's supervisor, Gordon Brown, instructed Anderson to go into a room alone and write down everything he knew about the incident.
- Anderson wrote a handwritten account of the accident as instructed and signed it in Brown's presence.
- Oakley Anderson died before the trial began.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against Defendant in federal district court.
- Because Plaintiff failed to make a timely demand for a jury trial, the case was set to be tried before the court with an advisory jury on the issue of liability.
- During the trial, Defendant offered into evidence a handwritten statement from its deceased employee, Oakley Anderson.
- The court admitted Anderson's statement over Plaintiff's hearsay objection.
- The advisory jury found for Defendant on the issue of liability.
- The court entered judgment for Defendant, finding Defendant was not negligent and that Plaintiff was contributorily negligent.
- Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the court erred in admitting Anderson's statement.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a handwritten, unsworn statement by a deceased declarant, written alone in a room shortly after an accident at his supervisor's direction, possess sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness to be admissible under the residual hearsay exception, Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(5)?
Opinions:
Majority - Joiner, District Judge
Yes. A handwritten statement by a deceased declarant possesses sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness to be admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(5) when it is made shortly after the event, while the memory is fresh, and without prompting or pressure from others. The court reasoned that Anderson's statement had trustworthiness equivalent to other hearsay exceptions because it was written on the afternoon of the accident while the events were fresh in his mind, and he wrote it alone without pressure from superiors. Furthermore, the court found it met the other prongs of Rule 804(b)(5): it was offered as evidence of a material fact (liability), it was more probative than any other evidence Defendant could reasonably procure due to Anderson's death, and its admission served the interests of justice.
Analysis:
This opinion provides a clear application of the residual hearsay exception, FRE 804(b)(5), which is intended for rare and exceptional circumstances. It demonstrates how a court may evaluate 'circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness' by focusing on factors like the statement's contemporaneity with the event and the absence of external influence or pressure. This case serves as a valuable precedent for litigants seeking to admit statements from unavailable declarants that do not fit neatly into traditional hearsay exceptions, emphasizing the Federal Rules' underlying goal of admitting reliable evidence to serve the interests of justice.
Unlock the full brief for Turbyfill v. International Harvester Co.