Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded by the prohibition of hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with a hearsay exception in accordance with the common law, statutes, and rules of court.

NOTE

This section is derived from Commonwealth v. Gil, 393 Mass. 204, 218, 471 N.E.2d 30, 40 (1984), and Bouchie v. Murray, 376 Mass. 524, 528–530, 381 N.E.2d 1295, 1298–1299 (1978). See Commonwealth v. McDonough, 400 Mass. 639, 643 n.8, 511 N.E.2d 551, 554 n.8 (1987). This type of layered hearsay is commonly referred to as “multiple hearsay,” see Commonwealth v. Gil, 393 Mass. at 218, 471 N.E.2d at 40; “totem pole hearsay,” see Commonwealth v. Santiago, 437 Mass. 620, 627 n.4, 774 N.E.2d 143, 148 n.4 (2002); or “hearsay within hearsay,” see Fed. R. Evid. 805. The decisions in Bouchie v. Murray, 376 Mass. at 528–530, 381 N.E.2d at 1298–1299, and Custody of Tracy, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 481, 484–486, 579 N.E.2d 1362, 1363–‌1365 (1991), illustrate the principle that under the terms of certain exceptions to the hearsay rule, the statements of multiple out-of-court declarants appearing in a single report or writing may be admissible, provided that each such statement falls within the applicable hearsay exception.