What is the difference between an admission by a party-opponent under Rule 801(d)(2) and an admission by a party's agent under Rule 801(d)(2)(D)?

• A. The former is a statement by the party themselves; the latter is a statement by someone authorized to speak on the party's behalf about a matter within the scope of that relationship.
• B. The former requires corroborating testimony; the latter does not.
• C. The former can only be oral; the latter can be written.
• D. There is no difference; both are the same.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is who is making the statement and their relationship to the party. An admission by a party-opponent covers statements made by the party themselves (or in a representative capacity) and statements by someone who is authorized to speak for the party on a matter within the scope of that relationship. In other words, it’s about whether the declarant is the party or someone acting on the party’s behalf in a role that lets them speak for the party.

So, the distinction is that an admission by the party themselves is a direct statement by the party, while an admission by the party’s agent is a statement by someone else who is authorized to speak for the party on a topic within the agent’s role or scope. The form of the statement (oral or written) isn’t the differentiating factor—both kinds of admissions can be oral or written. For example, a defendant’s own statement can be admitted as a party-opponent admission, and a corporate officer's statement about a matter within the officer’s authority can also be admitted as an admission by the party's agent.