Settlement offers and statements made during settlement negotiations are inadmissible if such offers and statements are offered to (i) show the validity or invalidity of a claim when the validity of the claim is in dispute, (ii) show the amount of damages when the amount of the claim is in dispute, or (iii) to impeach a witness by showing a prior inconsistent statement or specific contradiction.

Columbus-America Discovery Group, Inc. v. Unidentified, Wrecked And Abandoned Sailing Vessel, 742 F. Supp. 1327, 1343 (E.D. Va. 1990) (holding, in plaintiff search group's admiralty action against defendant salvage company, that "[e]ven if there be restrictions on the use of newspaper....Federal Rule of Evidence 803(16) and comparable State rules create a hearsay exception for statements in an authenticated document that is more than a certain number of years old, typically twenty years.

United States v. Portsmouth Paving Corp., 694 F.2d 312, 323 (4th Cir. 1982) (upholding trial court's admission of government witness's account of the telephone conversation as hearsay exception because "Remington's statement....To fall within the hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(1) or a comparable State rule for present sense impressions, a statement by the declarant (the maker of the statement) must be made at the time the declarant perceives the event or condition that the statement describes or explains, or immediately thereafter.

United States v. Banks, 405 F.3d 559, 570-571 (7th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission of witness's testimony about accused's history of storing cocaine in her apartment because it showed that "[accused] had opportunity, knowledge, and intent to store drugs in [witness's] apartment.").Another act, wrong, or crime is not barred by the character evidence rule if it is offered to show ability or opportunity or lack of ability or opportunity to commit a crime or other act, or to show person's presence or absence at scene of crime or elsewhere.