Opinion ID: 20073
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Second Slapping Incident

Text: Spring claims that the district court improperly precluded him from testifying that Ms. Reilly had told him during a visit to the nursing home about a second slapping incident that allegedly occurred after the initial complaint was filed. Springs argues that the testimony corroborates the first incident which forms the basis for the instant case. The court ruled that the evidence was inadmissible hearsay. 5 Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted. See FED.R.EVID. 801(a). The statement Ms. Reilly related to Spring out of court about the second slapping incident is classic hearsay. Spring do es not establish that the testimony meets any of the hearsay exemptions or exceptions under the Federal Rules of Evidence Furthermore, Spring does not show that the statement was offered for a proper non-hearsay purpose, for example, notice or state of mind. As such, the trial court did not abuse its discretion.