Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 24, 2017
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comMany business owners and managers are unaware that emails, text messages, voice mail messages, social media posts and even casual conversations can come back to haunt them in the event of a lawsuit. This is true even when these so-called “statements against interest” are made “off the record,” in informal settings, and outside of the workplace.

Statements (either written or oral) made out of court, which are offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, are considered hearsay. Because the statements were made outside of the courtroom and not subject to cross-examination, they are considered untrustworthy and unreliable and, thus, are typically not admissible at trial. However, many hearsay exceptions exist under both the New Jersey Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Statements against interest are one exception to the rule prohibiting the admissibility of hearsay testimony. Under New Jersey Rule of Evidence 803(c)(25), a statement against interest is defined as:
A statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary, proprietary, or social interest, or so far tended to subject declarant to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid declarant’s claim against another, that a reasonable person in declarant’s position would not have made the statement unless the person believed it to be true. Such a statement is admissible against an accused in a criminal action only if the accused was the declarant.
Under the New Jersey Rules of Evidence, the rationale for why such an out-of-court statement should be considered sufficiently reliable to qualify as an exception to the hearsay rule is that people don’t typically say unfavorable things about themselves unless they are true. As explained by the Supreme Court of New Jersey in State v. White, 158 N.J. 230 (1999): “The statement-against-interest exception is based on the theory that, by human nature, individuals will neither assert, concede, nor admit to facts that would affect them unfavorably. Consequently, statements that so disserve the declarant are deemed inherently trustworthy and reliable.”
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) includes a similar exception for statements made by a declarant who is unavailable as a witness at the time of trial.
Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) defines a statement against interest as a statement that:
A reasonable person in the declarant’s position would have made only if the person believed it to be true because, when made, it was so contrary to the declarant’s proprietary or pecuniary interest or had so great a tendency to invalidate the declarant’s claim against someone else or to expose the declarant to civil or criminal liability; and the statement is supported by corroborating circumstances that clearly indicate its trustworthiness, if it is offered in a criminal case as one that tends to expose the declarant to criminal liability.
The Advisory Committee’s Note to the Federal Rules of Evidence similarly states, “The circumstantial guarantee of reliability for declarations against interest is the assumption that persons do not make statements which are damaging to themselves unless satisfied for good reason that they are true.”
Of course, the statement against interest exception is not the only way that litigants can get around the hearsay rule. When involved in a business dispute, it is important to always remember that your emails, text messages, voice mail messages, social media posts and informal conversations can negatively impact imminent or pending litigation.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Compliance programs are no longer judged by how they look on paper, but by how they function in the real world. Compliance monitoring is the ongoing process of reviewing, testing, and evaluating whether policies, procedures, and controls are being followed—and whether they are actually working. What Is Compliance Monitoring? In today’s heightened regulatory environment, compliance […]
Author: Dan Brecher

New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
Author: Charles H. Friedrich

Commercial real estate trends in 2026 are being shaped by shifting economic conditions, technological innovation, and evolving tenant demands. As the market adjusts to changing interest rates, capital flows, and workplace models, investors, owners, tenants, and developers must understand how these trends are influencing opportunities and risk in the year ahead. Overall Outlook for Commercial […]
Author: Michael J. Willner

Part 2 – Tips Excluded from Income Certain employees and independent contractors may be eligible to deduct tips from their income for tax years 2025 through 2028 under provisions included in the One Big Beautiful Bill. The deduction is capped at $25,000 per year and begins to phase out at $150,000 of modified adjusted gross […]
Author: Scott H. Novak

Part 1 – Overtime Pay and Income Tax Treatment Overview This Firm Insights post summarizes one provision of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” related to the tax treatment of overtime compensation and related employer wage reporting obligations. Overtime Pay and Employee Tax Treatment The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) generally requires that overtime be paid […]
Author: Scott H. Novak

In 2025, New York enacted one of the most consequential updates to its consumer protection framework in decades. The Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable Business Practices Act (FAIR Act) significantly expands the scope and strength of New York’s long-standing consumer protection statute, General Business Law § 349, and alters the compliance landscape for New York […]
Author: Dan Brecher
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!