If behavior is largely volitional rather than semi-volitional or semi-automatic, it is hot habit.

McDonough v. City of Quincy, 452 F.3d 8, 21 (1st Cir. 2006) (holding, in plaintiff police officer's unlawful retaliation action against defendant city, that the trial court properly admitted the out-of-court statements....A statement is imputed to a principal or to an employer and is treated as the principal's or employer's vicarious admission (which, like other admissions is exempt from the hearsay rule) if the principal or employer is a party, the statement is offered against the principal or party, the statement is a statement by the party's agent or employee about a matter within the scope of the agent's agency or the employee's employment, and the statement is made during the principal-agent or employer-employee relationship.

United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1073-1074 (9th Cir. 2005) (upholding the trial court's admission into evidence of the records of conviction because (1) "pursuant to Rule 902(4), the records were certified as correct....Federal Rule of Evidence 902(4) provides that a document is sufficiently authenticated to be admissible if the document appears to be a certified copy of a public record, provided the document appears to be certified as correct by the custodian or by another person who is authorized to make the certification.

Cf. Sanjuan v. IBP, Inc., 160 F.3d 1291, 1297 (10th Cir. 1998) (holding, in employee's civil action for retaliatory discharge against employer, that evidence of other employees' complaints for harassment and mistreatment was admissible where it was offered to show that employer had the motive or...The prohibition against circumstantial use of character -- the use of character, propensity, or disposition to show conduct on a particular occasion -- is inapplicable in trials of civil actions.