In a products liability case, what is P's best argument against admitting a friend's statement to a paramedic about P's drinking?

The best argument against admitting a friend's statement to a paramedic about P's drinking is that the friend is not legally responsible for P. In the context of a products liability case, establishing liability usually involves demonstrating that the defendant's product caused harm to the plaintiff. A statement from a friend about P's drinking does not hold any weight in terms of establishing liability or negligence on part of the product's manufacturer or seller.

The concern here is that the friend’s statement doesn't carry any legal authority or accountability in relation to the facts of the case, meaning it wouldn't be particularly reliable or relevant in proving or disproving claims made in the lawsuit. Unlike medical professionals, who may have an obligation to provide accurate information for a patient's treatment, a friend's casual observation lacks the necessary legal significance. Thus, focusing on the friend's lack of responsibility underlines the irrelevance of their statement in relation to the overall liabilities that need to be discussed in court.