relevance

Question 1

relevance– logical relevance

Answer 1

logical relevance: Evidence is relevant if it tends to make existence of any fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence

Relevant evidence may be (but is not automatically) admissible

Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible

Question 2

similar accidents or injuries caused by same condition

Answer 2

generally admissible to show existence of dangerous condition or cause of the injury or that D had notice of the condition

Question 3

FRE 403– legal relevance

Answer 3

legal relevance means that the probative value of the evidence must not be substantially outweighed by the danger of (1) unfair prejudice, (2) confusion of the issues, (3) misleading the jury, (4) undue delay, or (5) the needless presentaiton of cumulative evidence

Even if evidence is relevant, judge has discretion to exclude

Question 4

P’s prior accidents or lawsuits

Answer 4

generally inadmissible
except: pre-existing conditions, and pattern of false claims

Question 5

previous similar acts to prove intent

Answer 5

Similar occurrences may be admissible to show D’s intent in current case

Question 6

other generally admissible similar occurrence evidence

Answer 6

rebutting claims of impossibility, establishing values via comparable sales, routine practice evidence of an org, industrial custom evidence

Question 7

habit evidence

Answer 7

as opposed to character evidence, generally admissible as circ evidence the person acted in accordance with habit on occasion in question
habit = regular response to specific set of circ; repeated conduct; specific conduct in specific situation

Question 8

unfair prejudice

Answer 8

evidence has the potential to move the jury to decide the case on improper basis: (1) where evidence can cause jury to decide case based on emotion; (2) evidence admissible on limited basis

Question 9

public policy exclusions

Answer 9

liability insurance, subsequent remedial measures, civil settlements and settlement negotiations, plea discussions, payments of and offers to pay medical expenses

Question 10

liability insurance

Answer 10

inadmissible: to prove negligence or ability to pay damages

admissible: to prove ownership or control, as impeachment, or as part of an admission of liability

Question 11

subsequent remedial measures

Answer 11

inadmissible: to prove negligence, culpable conduct, defect in product or its design, or need for warning or instruction

admissible: to prove ownership or control, if disputed, rebut a claim that a precaution was not feasible, or  to prove that the opposing party had destroyed evidence

Question 12

settlement offers or negotiations

Answer 12

inadmissible: to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim, or to impeach by prior inconsistent statement or contradiction

disputed claim required
-evidence excluded only if:
-claim/threat of claim has been brought
-disputed as to validity or amount owed

accompanying admissions of fact are also not admisisble

admissible: for all other purposes

Question 13

settlement offers or negotiations

Answer 13

inadmissible: to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim, or to impeach by prior inconsistent statement or contradiction

disputed claim required
-evidence excluded only if:
-claim/threat of claim has been brought
-disputed as to validity or amount owed

accompanying admissions of fact are also not admissible

admissible: for all other purposes

Question 14

payments of and offers to pay medical expenses

Answer 14

inadmissible: to prove liability for the injury

but accompanying admissions of fact are admissible

admissible: for all other purposes

Question 15

plea discussions

Answer 15

inadmissible: withdrawn guilty please, offers to plead guilty, nolo contendere pleas, and statements in plea discussions

admissible: actual guilty pleas generally admissible