Vinyard v. Vinyard Funeral Home, Inc. - 435 S.W.2d 392 (Mo. Ct. App. 1968)

Rule:

Where, regardless of the truth or the falsity of a statement, the fact that it has been made is relevant, the hearsay rule does not apply, but the statement may be shown. Evidence as to the making of such statement is not secondary but primary, for the statement itself may constitute a fact in issue, or be circumstantially relevant as to the existence of such a fact. 

Facts:

One rainy night the invitee slipped and fell when she stepped from a roughly paved surface onto a smoothly paved surface of a ramp in the business' dimly lighted parking lot. The business knew the smoothly paved area was slippery when wet. The trial court found in favor of the invitee in an action to recover damages for personal injuries. The business argued on appeal that trial court erred because the evidence of the condition of business' parking lot did not show an unreasonable risk of injury to visitors and that the condition was not discoverable by visitors.

Issue:

Was evidence of complaints of slickness made to the business relevant to the material issue of the business' knowledge?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed, holding that (1) the business' own witnesses testified that the parking lot was slick when wet, and that the sealed upper area was slicker than the unsealed lower area; (2) the trial court properly admitted evidence that knowledge of the condition of the parking lot had come to the business through complaints of patrons that the parking lot's sealed area was slick when wet; and (3) considering the opportunity of the business to cross-examine the witness who had had a similar fall and to develop any existing dissimilarities between the conditions surrounding the two falls, the trial court did not err in admitting the testimony.