Carson, an employee truck driver for the CheapCheap store, was arrested by the Highway Patrol following a hit and run accident where he is the alleged driver of the vehicle that fled the scene. At the time of his arrest, Carson admitted to the Highway Patrol officer that he was delivering goods for his employer, and that he was texting his office at the time of the accident. He stated that he heard the thud but did not stop. At trial, where CheapCheap is charged as the responsible party, the prosecutor wants to introduce the statement Carson made to the Highway Patrol officer to establish CheapCheap’s responsibility for the accident. Can the statement be introduced during the trial?

Question

a. No, Carson’s statement is inadmissible hearsay because Carson had no authority to speak on behalf of his employer.
b. Yes, because Carson was an employee and acting in the scope of his employment at the time of the incident, and his statement may be admissible as an admission by an agent.
c. Yes, because, as an employee, Carson is considered a co-conspirator, and his statement may be admissible as an admission by a co-conspirator.
d. No, because Carson is a low-level employee and has no authority to bind the company to a statement he makes.

Answer 1

b. Yes, because Carson was an employee and acting in the scope of his employment at the time of the incident, and his statement may be admissible as an admission by an agent.