You suffered terrible injury.
You believe your doctor was careless.
You believe your doctor violated the basic standards of medical care.
You believe you are more likely right than wrong that what you are claiming is true.
You have eyewitnesses to support your valid claim.
Your trial goes on for weeks.
You are sitting and observing your trial every single day.
One of your close friends is called to testify on your behalf.
Your attorney is asking him questions about what he observed and things you can and cannot do.
He's testifying about your injuries and your damages.
He has personal knowledge of the problems and disabilities you are experiencing.
He makes you proud.
When your attorney finishes questioning him, the defense lawyer gets up to cross-examine him.
Your friend has told the jury that your injuries are permanent.
He has told them that you will have difficulty doing specific daily activities on a day-to-day basis.
He learned this information by talking to a friend of yours as well as a doctor whom he also knows.
The defense lawyer makes it abundantly clear that his original testimony did not come entirely from his own personal observations.
During the course of heated cross-examination, your friend, while still on the witness stand, attempts to tell the jury what this doctor told him.
The defense lawyer immediately yells out “Objection, that's hearsay!”
The judge quickly agrees and tells your friend on the witness stand that he cannot talk about a conversation he had with someone who is not in court.
This is important when neither side is planning to call that friend or that doctor to testify.