A statement is admissible under the hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a comparable State rule only if circumstantial evidence shows that the affected statement is as trustworthy as the statements that are made admissible by the hearsay exceptions created by Federal Rules of Evidence 803 and 804 or by comparable State rules.

Wiener v. Farm Credit Bank of St. Louis, 759 F. Supp. 510, 521 (E.D. Ark. 1991) (holding, in plaintiff optionees' action against defendant bank for specific performance of real estate contracts, that evidence of telephone conversation....Although settlement negotiations and offers are inadmissible (i) to show the validity or invalidity of a claim when validity is in dispute, (ii) to show the amount of damages when the amount is in dispute, or (iii) to impeach by showing a prior inconsistent statement or specific contradiction, settlement evidence is admissible to show that a party had knowledge or notice of a fact.

Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(C) ("identification of a person made after perceiving the person").A pretrial identification is exempt from the federal hearsay rule only if the declarant -- the witness who makes the pretrial identification -- makes the pretrial identification after perceiving the person the witness so identified.

Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172, pin? (1997).Evidence that is relevant to a material fact is relevant for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 401 and the federal law of evidence even though the material fact is undisputed.