Misc

Question 1

Types of Verdicts

Answer 1

In a jury trial, the judge has complete discretion to decide which verdict to use—general verdict, general verdict with answers, or special verdict.

General
1. Jury finds in favor of, and awards any damages to, particular party
2. No statement on jury’s findings of fact

General Verdict w Answers
1. Jury finds in favor of, and awards any damages to, particular party
2. Jury answers questions on specified factual issues

Special Verdict
1. Jury answers questions on specified factual issues
2. Judge applies law to jury’s answers & enters appropriate judgment

Remember… juries are triers of fact…

Question 2

Leading Questions

Answer 2

Leading questions generally are inadmissible on direct examination.

However, the federal rules allow leading questions on direct examination in certain situations when it is necessary to develop testimony, such as when the witness is a child, has difficulty communicating due to age or a physical or mental problem, is hostile, is an adverse party, or is associated with an adverse party.

Question 3

Excluding Witnesses From Courtroom

Answer 3

At a party’s request, the court must order the exclusion of a witness from the courtroom so that the party cannot hear the testimony of the other witnesses, unless an exception applies.

EXCEPT
i) A **party **who is a natural person;

ii) One officer or employee of a party that is not a natural person if that officer or employee has been designated as the party’s representative by its attorney, including a police officer in charge of the investigation in a criminal case;

iii) Any person whose presence is essential to a party’s presentation of its case; or

iv) A person, such as a victim, whose presence is permitted by statute.

Question 4

curative admissibility

Answer 4

The doctrine of curative admissibility allows otherwise inadmissible evidence to be admitted to rebut prejudicial evidence when

(1) the evidence was** improperly admitted through no fault of the prejudiced party,**
(2) that party objected to and moved to strike the evidence, and
(3) an instruction to disregard cannot remedy the prejudice.

Question 5

FRE x Grand Jury

Answer 5

FRE do NOT apply to grand jury proceedings

Question 5

Exception to Negotiations Bar

Answer 5

Conduct/statements admissible for above purposes if:
1. made during negotiations in civil dispute** involving government** regulatory, investigative, or enforcement agency and offered in subsequent criminal case
**
2. Admissible for other purpose**—eg:
proving witness’s bias or prejudice
negating contention of undue delay
proving effort to obstruct criminal investigation or prosecution

Question 6

Settlement Offer Exception & Scope

Answer 6

an offer of compromise (ie, settlement offer) is inadmissible to prove the validity or amount of a disputed claim.

But this rule only applies if there was a pending dispute at the time the offer was made (not seen here).

Question 7

Affirm Defense BOP

Answer 7

While due process requires that the prosecution prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, a defendant can bear the burden to prove an affirmative defense by any evidentiary standard.

Question 8

Bursting Bubble

Answer 8

Under the “bursting bubble” approach followed by the Federal Rules of Evidence,
==> the opposing party in a civil suit can overcome a rebuttable presumption by producing sufficient evidence to contradict the presumed fact.
==> Once this occurs, **the presumption “bursts” and the fact finder (eg, jury) must weigh the evidence **to decide the issue.

But the ultimate burden of persuasion—in most civil cases, proving a fact by a preponderance of the evidence—remains with the party who had it originally.

*The bursting-bubble approach does not apply to conclusive presumptions or in federal diversity cases, where state law governs the effect of a presumption.

Question 9

Judicial Notice

Answer 9

Judicial notice is** mandatory if a party requests it and supplies the court with the necessary information **to indicate that the fact is not subject to reasonable dispute.

But in a criminal case, the jury cannot be instructed to accept a noticed fact as conclusive since this would impermissibly limit the defendant’s right to a jury trial. Instead, the ** jury must be instructed that it may or may not accept** the noticed fact as conclusive.*