Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Citation
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Parent Document
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 2013-01-24
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5146099/bridges-v-clark/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (47)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
- Bridges v. Clark, 59 A.3d 978 (2013)
Full Text
704 charsSecond, Mr. Clark argues that the Love affidavit is inadmissible because Mr. Love was neither a party to the case nor an employee of Mr. Clark. It is of course true that Mr. Love was not a party to this case, and we agree that the record would not support a conclusion that Mr. Love was an employee of Mr. Clark. The Love affidavit thus would not properly have been admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(A) (statements of parties) or 801(d)(2)(D) (statements of agent or employee of party). But the Love affidavit nevertheless was properly admissible as an adoptive admission under the principles of Rule 801(d)(2)(B), because Mr. Clark manifested his belief in the truth of that statement.