If some human utterance has legal significance under applicable substantive law and the utterance is offered to establish that a verbal act having such legal significance has taken place, the utterance is not hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(c) or a "statement" for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 801(a)(2) even if the utterance also contains an assertion or appears to contain an an assertion.

Dixon v. International Harvester Co., 754 F.2d 573, 583-584 (5th Cir. 1985) (holding, in plaintiff's products liability action, that evidence of alternatively designed tractors having additional protection was admissible to prove feasibility ).A subsequent remedial measure is not barred by the rule limiting admissibility of subsequent remedial measures if the subsequent remedial measure is offered to impeach a witness or to show any matter (such as ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures) other than negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product, a defect in a product's design, or a need for a warning or instruction; but a subsequent remedial measure may be used to show feasibility of precautionary measures only if feasibility has been controverted.

Reeder v. American Economy Insurance Company, 88 F.3d 892, 894-895 (10th Cir. 1996) (holding, in plaintiff insurer's diversity action against defendant insurance company, that evidence of defendant's offer to settle the suit for $1 million,....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.

Hall v. Commissioner, 729 F.2d 632, 634-635 (9th Cir. 1984) (holding that the tax court properly excluded the undated annual contribution statement as a business record because no foundation was laid by a qualified....The exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(11) for religious records applies only if the record was created near the time of the recorded act.