Relevance Flashcards
what is “relevant” evidence?
evidence that has any tendency to make the existence of any fact of consequence more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence
what two qualities must the evidence have to be “relevant”?
the evidence must be…
1) material, and
2) probative
true or false: irrelevant evidence is always inadmissible
TRUE
what 2 things will keep out relevant evidence?
either…
1) a specific exclusionary rule of evidence (ie–hearsay, privilege, etc)
2) court’s discretion to exclude under Rule 403 (prejudice)
what is the Rule 403 balancing test?
judge has broad discretion to exclude relevant evidence if:
its probative value is SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED by the danger of any of the following:
- unfair prejudice (most common)
- confusion of the issues
- misleading the jury
- undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of redundant evidence
**NOTE = favors inclusion
true or false: generally, evidence involving some time, event, or person other than that involved in the present case is INADMISSIBLE.
TRUE (but there are many exceptions)
what are the exceptions to the inadmissibility of “prior occurrences”? (8)
1) plaintiff’s accident history
2) similar accidents/injuries caused by same event/condition
3) prior similar acts admissible to prove intent
4) sales of similar property
5) rebutting claim of impossibility
6) causation
7) habit and routine business evidence
8) industry custom to show standard of care
when can a plaintiff’s accident history be admissible? (exception to inadmissibility of similar occurrences)
if it tends to show something other than carelessness; such as…
- prior similar false claims to show that the present claim is likely false
- previous injuries to the same part of the plaintiff’s body (to show injury is at least somewhat attributable to the prior injury and not the current one)
when is evidence of prior accidents/injuries caused by the same event/condition admissible? (3 elements + context)
when it occurred under substantially similar circumstances, and it is being offered to prove:
1) the existence of a dangerous condition,
2) that the dangerous condition was the cause of the present injury, AND
3) the defendant had notice of the dangerous condition
when is evidence of the ABSENCE of similar accidents admissible?
only to show a defendant’s lack of knowledge of the danger (ie – absence of complaint)
**NOTE = NOT admissible to show absence of negligence or lack of defect
true or false: similar conduct previously committed by a party is NOT admissible to show the party’s present motive or intent in the current case.
FALSE (prior similar conduct CAN be admissible to prove present intent/motive)
evidence of similar personal or real property around the same time period is admissible to show what?
the property’s value
**NOTE = prices in mere offers to purchase are generally NOT admissible
when may the requirement that prior occurrences be similar to the present case be relaxed?
when prior occurrences are being used to REBUT a claim of impossibility
**EX = D claims car can’t go above 50 mph, P introduces evidence of other times the car has gone above 50 mph
true or false: complicated issues of causation may be established by evidence concerning other times, events, or persons.
TRUE
**EX = damage to nearby homes caused by D’s blasting is relevant to prove D’s blasting damaged P’s home)
when is evidence of a person’s habit admissible?
when used as circumstantial evidence that the person acted in accordance with the habit on the occasion at issue in the case
