Carr ran into and injured Pedersen, a pedestrian. With Carr in his car were Wanda and Walter Passenger. Passerby saw the accident and called the police department, which sent Sheriff to investigate. All of these people were available as potential witnesses in the case of Pedersen v. Carr. Pedersen alleges that Carr, while drunk, struck Pedersen, who was in a duly marked crosswalk.Pedersen's counsel wants to have Sheriff testify to the following statement made to him by Walter Passenger, out of the presence of Carr: "We were returning from a party at which we had all been drinking." The trial judge should rule this testimony
admissible as an admission of a party. admissible as a declaration against interest. inadmissible, because it is hearsay, not within any exception.  inadmissible, because it would lead the court into nonessential side issues
Question: Carr ran into and injured Pedersen, a pedestrian. With Carr in his car were Wanda and Walter Passenger. Passerby saw the accident and called the police department, which sent Sheriff to investigate. All of these people were available as potential witnesses in the case of Pedersen v. Carr. Pedersen alleges that Carr, while drunk, struck Pedersen, who was in a duly marked crosswalk.Pedersen's counsel wants to have Sheriff testify to the following statement made to him by Walter Passenger, out of the presence of Carr: "We were returning from a party at which we had all been drinking." The trial judge should rule this testimony
A. admissible as an admission of a party.
B. admissible as a declaration against interest.
C. inadmissible, because it is hearsay, not within any exception. 
D. inadmissible, because it would lead the court into nonessential side issues
Answer: