EXCEPTIONS TO THE GENERAL RELEVANCE RULE

Question 1

GENERALLY

Answer 1

Previous similar happenings and transactions of the parties and other similarly situated may be relevant if they are probative of the material issue involves, and if that probative value outweighs the risk that the evidence will confuse the jury or result in unfair prejudice.

Question 2

CAUSATION

Answer 2

complicated issues of causation may often be established by evidence that concerns other times, events or persons

Question 3

PRIOR FALSE CLAIMS OR SAME BODILY INJURY

Answer 3

evidence that a person has filed a SIMILAR tort claims or been involved in prior accidents is generally inadmissible- BUT if evidence is used to show that the party ha made previous similar FALSE claims, usually relevant (common plan or scheme theory) to show that the present claim is likely to be false
- where the prior claim was for an injury to the SAME PORTION OF THE PLAINTIFF’S body that P claims was injured in the present case, evidence can be used to show that present claim is false or exaggerated.

Question 4

SIMILAR ACCIDENTS OR INJURIES CAUSED BY SAME EVENT OR CONDITION

Answer 4

similar accidents/ injuries cause by same event/ condition evidence is admissible to prove:

1. defect/ dangerous condition existed
2. D had knowledge of the defect/ dangerous condition
3. defect/ dangerous condition was cause of present injury

Question 5

ABSENCE OF SIMILAR ACCIDENTS

Answer 5

For unchanged structural condition, court has discretion to admit evidence of absence of other complaints to show lack of a defect and evidence of prior safety history and complaints is admissible to show D’s lack of knowledge that there was danger

Question 6

PREVIOUS SIMILAR ACTS ADMISSIBLE TO PROVE INTENT

Answer 6

previously committed similar conduct is admissible to show the party’s present motive or intent when such elements are relevant. (Previous MO)

Question 7

REBUTTING CLAIM OF IMPOSSIBILITY

Answer 7

Prior occurrence similar to those litigated standard is relaxed when the evidence is used to REBUT a claim or defense of impossibility.

Question 8

SALE OF SIMILAR PROPERTY

Answer 8

admissible to prove value if not too remote in time

• requires preliminary finding that the character, usage, proximity, date of sale, etc are sufficiently similar to the property in issue
• prices quoted in mere offers- NOT admissible

Question 9

HABIT- FREQUENCY OF CONDUCT/ PARTICULARITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES

Answer 9

Evidence of a person’s habit may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the habit. Must be shown to be a regular response to a repeated specific situation.
- can be introduced in circumstances when it is not admissible to introduce character evidence

Question 10

INDUSTRIAL OR BUSINESS ROUTINE

Answer 10

evidence that a business or firm had an established business routine is relevant as tending to show that a particular event occurred.

Question 11

INDUSTRIAL CUSTOM AS EVIDENCE OF STANDARD OF CARE

Answer 11

custom of the industry is offered to prove the actions of other persons in the same industry in an attemot to show adherence to or deviance from an industry-wide standard of care