In Holland v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 940, the trial court granted the employer-defendant's summary judgment motion where the plaintiff alleging employment discrimination had failed to file a timely administrative complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). In so doing, the court sustained the defendant's hearsay objection to the plaintiff's evidentiary support for his contention that his late-filing should be equitably excused because he was misled by inaccurate advice from the DFEH. (Id. at pp. 943-944.) That evidence included alleged statements by DFEH officials to the plaintiff (1) two months before the filing deadline that he need not be concerned about the deadline, and (2) that, notwithstanding its postponement of its interview with him until days before the deadline, his timely submission of a completed questionnaire would suffice in asserting a timely claim. (Id. at p. 947.) (The DFEH did not send the plaintiff a formal complaint to be completed until after the one-year claim period had expired. (Ibid.) The appellate court--citing Justice Jefferson's treatise--reversed, concluding that the evidence supporting equitable excuse was improperly excluded, because the alleged DFEH statements were not offered for their truth, but to explain that the plaintiff heard them and acted in conformity with the information contained in them. (Id. at p. 947.)