Short answer. As a general rule, no. Rule 130, Section 29 provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, except as otherwise provided by the rules. A third party's act or statement is generally not usable as an admission against someone who did not make or join it.
What the law says
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, except as hereinafter provided.
Rule 130, Section 29 — Admission by third party. Read the full provision →
The general rule protects against third-party statements
Section 29 sets a general protective principle: the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another. As a baseline, one person's out-of-court act or statement should not be usable as evidence to harm a different person who did not make it and had no part in it. This protects a party from being bound by things said or done by people over whom that party had no control and with whom that party may have no meaningful connection. The provision reflects a basic due-process concern: a person should have the opportunity to confront and contest the evidence used against them, which is difficult or impossible when that evidence consists of another person's words or conduct made outside their presence and beyond their control.
Why this fits with the admission rules generally
This section works as a counterweight to Section 27, which allows a party's own act, declaration, or omission to be used against that same party. Section 29 makes clear that this admission principle is personal to the person who made it — it does not automatically extend to bind someone else. Recognizing this personal limitation helps explain why the rules elsewhere carefully define specific relationships, such as agency or conspiracy, under which an exception can properly apply.
The 'except as hereinafter provided' qualifier
The rule is not absolute. It expressly allows for exceptions provided elsewhere in the rules — recognized categories such as admissions by a co-partner, agent, joint owner, or conspirator can, under specific conditions set out in those other provisions, bind another party. Outside those defined exceptions, though, Section 29's general protection applies. A party seeking to use a third party's act or statement against someone else generally needs to show it falls within one of those defined exceptions. Because these exceptions are defined narrowly elsewhere in the rules, courts do not presume that a relationship like partnership or agency exists merely because two people are connected in some general way — the party invoking the exception carries the burden of establishing the specific relationship that triggers it.