Xerxes Avenue South, Edina, MN 55410, Respondent, Backtraj Ramjeet, Defendant. Appellants moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, alternatively, for a new trial. This appeal followed. N I. Ramjeet's Statement Appellants claim the district court erred in allowing the written statement of Backtraj Ramjeet to be received as evidence, arguing that the statement is hearsay. A district court has broad discretion in determining whether to admit or exclude evidence, and its ruling will not be disturbed unless it is based on an erroneous view of the law or constitutes an abuse of discretion.
Hearsay is generally inadmissible.
Minn. R. Evid. Defense counsel subsequently read into evidence Ramjeet's written statement describing his work on the van. Although the statement was prepared by an insurance investigator, Ramjeet reviewed the statement, corrected and initialed mistakes, and signed it, indicating that the statement was true to the best of his knowledge and belief. Ramjeet's statement, which was consistent with his trial testimony and helpful in evaluating his credibility as a witness, also was offered and received by the district court as an exhibit. Appellants also argue that the statement is unreliable.