In civil trials, when can hearsay evidence be admitted if the maker is available?

Hearsay evidence can be admitted in civil trials when there is a risk of undue expense or delay, particularly when the original declarant is available to provide direct testimony. This principle is grounded in promoting the efficiency of the court process. If admitting hearsay would significantly reduce the time and resources expended on a trial, the court may see the value in allowing such evidence as a practical solution to administrative burdens.

While other situations could justify the admission of hearsay, they do not specifically apply when the maker of the statement is available. For instance, matters of public interest may not necessarily override the rule against hearsay if the declarant can provide their testimony directly. Similarly, mutual agreement between parties for admission does not intrinsically create a basis for hearsay to be accepted; the court still retains discretion based on legal standards. Lastly, while new information may be compelling, it alone does not provide a basis for the hearsay rule to be relaxed if the declarant’s presence is viable for direct testimony. Thus, the condition of potential undue expense or delay effectively justifies the admission of hearsay when the declarant is accessible.