How often do we rely upon statements made by individuals without knowing their identity? It may be as simple as the train conductor who tells you where the train is heading, or as important as a 911 operator assuring you that help is on the way. In both cases you are relying on the speaker to give you truthful information without knowing his or her identity. When would such a statement be admissible in court?
If the statement is being offered for its truthfulness, then one roadblock to admission is hearsay. The contours of the exceptions to the hearsay rule are often subject to debate. One exception that lends itself particularly well to the admission of statements by unidentified declarants is N.J.R.E. 803(b)(4), which allows statements by a "party’s agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship." But what happens when the party’s agent or employee is unidentified? Under what context in a civil case will a court admit that statement? New Jersey courts have come down on both sides, with the New Jersey Supreme Court having not yet weighed in, but there does appear to be a pattern both for and against admission.
