{"id":"LAW-063","kind":"law","level":"law","jurisdiction":"","state":"","metro":"","industry":"","agency":"","eco":"","issuer":"United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","authority":"American Title Insurance Co. v. Lacelaw Corp., 861 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1988) (CAP text)","instrument":"American Title Insurance Co. v. Lacelaw Corp., 861 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1988) (CAP text)","title":"American Title Insurance Co. v. Lacelaw Corp., 861 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1988) (CAP text)","dateIssued":"1988-11-09","effective":"","end":"","startDate":"1988-11-09","endDate":"","quarters":[],"types":[],"addressees":[],"clause":"(2) An Opposing Party\u0027s Statement. The statement is offered against an opposing party and: (A) was made by the party in an individual or representative capacity; (B) is one the party manifested that it adopted or believed to be true; (C) was made by a person whom the party authorized to make a statement on the subject; (D) was made by the party\u0027s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of that relationship and while it existed (FRE 801(d)(2))... The Justice Department here has, as clearly as possible, manifested its belief in the substance of the contested documents; it has submitted them to other federal courts to show the truth of the matter contained therein. \u0027color of its stripes\u0027 is at 127, so the range \u0027127-28, 130-31\u0027 may stand]... The government cannot indicate to one federal court that certain statements are trustworthy and accurate, and then argue to a jury in another federal court that those same assertions are hearsay (Kattar at 131)... the government department charged with the development of rules for highway safety was the relevant and competent section of the government; its pamphlet on sobriety testing was an admissible party admission (Van Griffin at 638)... We agree and hold that statements of fact contained in a brief may be considered admissions of the party in the discretion of the district court (Lacelaw at 227)","enforcement":"","functions":[],"notes":"Never \u0027is estopped\u0027; never equitable estoppel; never Heckler v. Community Health Services.","sourceUrl":"https://static.case.law/f2d/861/html/0224-01.html","snapshot":"","fileExists":true,"fileBytes":151191,"grade":"primary","character":"case","description":"","collection":"LEG-A","url":"/library/LAW-063","exhibitUrl":"/exhibit/LAW-063","citation":"United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, American Title Insurance Co. v. Lacelaw Corp., 861 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1988) (CAP text) (Nov. 9, 1988) (Ex. LAW-063)","stateName":"","related":[]}