Relevance Flashcards
Logical relevance? Rule?
Evidence that has any tendency to make a material fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
FRE 403
What are the three warning signals for questions involving evidence that may not be logically relevant? If it involves . . .
Some other time, event, or person than the one directly involved in the litigation.
Relevant evidence can be excluded under 403 if its probative value is SUBSTANTIALLY outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following? (6)
What is not a consideration?
Unfair prejudice Confusion of the issues Misleading the jury Undue delay Wasting time Needless presenting cumulative evidence
NOT = unfair surprise.
Are similar occurrences, disparate in either time, even, or parties, are admissible to show causation?
Yes, when causation is complicated.
Are a party’s prior accidents or claims admissible?
Generally, no.
When can a party’s prior accidents or claims becomes admissible? (2)
To show common plan of scheme or fraud
Where prior claims are relevant to damages to plaintiff.
Other accidents involving the same instrumentality which occurred under similar circumstances are admissible to show . . . (3)
Notice
Knowledge
Instrumentality is defective/dangerous
Are similar occurrences, disparate in either time, even, or parties, are admissible to show intent or state of mind?
Yes
Similar occurrences, disparate in either time, even, or parties, are admissible to rebut what defense?
Impossibility
The sale price of other chattels or parcels of real property is admissible IF the other chattels or parcels . . . (3)
HINT: This is logical relevance, so consider the three warning signs.
Fit the same general description
Were sold in the same general time period
Exist in the same geographic area.
When is habit evidence admissible?
To prove that on a particular occasion, the person acted in accordance with their habit.
Is disposition evidence admissible?
No
Is prior act evidence admissible?
No
What two key descriptive words distinguish habit from disposition and prior acts?
Specificity
Recurrence
What is the recommended threshold of occurances for which habit can be discussed?
Three
Is business routine admissible?
Yes
Industrial or trade custom is admissible as . . .
Non-conclusive evidence of a standard of care.
What are the three areas of importance under Discretionary Policy-Based Relevance?
Liability Insurance
Subsequent remedial acts
Settlements
When is liability insurance admissible? (2)
To show ownership or control
To impeach by showing interest or bias
For what purposes are subsequent remedial measures not admissible? To prove . . .
Negligence
Culpable conduct
Product defects
Design defects
Need for a warning or instruction
For what purposes are subsequent remedial measures admissible? (4)
Which three require the issue to be in dispute?
Impeachment
To prove ownership (if disputed)
To prove control (if disputed)
To prove the feasibility of precautionary measures (if disputed)
Settlements are not admissible to prove . . . (3)
Fault
Liability
Amount of damage
The inadmissibility of settlements includes . . . (5)
Actual compromises
Offers to compromise
Offers to plead guilty (criminal)
Withdrawn guilty pleas
Pleas of nolo contendere
For settlements to be excluded from evidence, what two things must be true?
There must be a claim
The claim must be disputed as to either liability or amount
When can an offer to pay medical expenses be admissible?
If an admission accompanies a naked offer (non-settlement offer) to pay hospital or medical expenses.
HYPO: D says, “Let’s settle. I will admit I was negligent. Let’s agree on the amount of damage.” Admissible? Explain
No. Admission of negligence was made as a part of a settlement discussion of the disputed damage issue.
HYPO: D says, “It was all my fault. Let me pay your hospital bill.” Admissible?
Yes. Admission was made as part of a naked offer to pay the medical bill and that is not a settlement offer.
Four questions to ask yourself when dealing with character evidence questions.
PMTT
Purpose of offer of character evidence?
Method of proving character?
Type of case (civil vs. criminal)?
What character trait is involved?
What are three appropriate purposes/scenarios for character evidence?
Which is only permitted in criminal cases once the door is opened?
Character is directly at issue
Character provides circumstantial evidence of a person’s conduct during the event (criminal; door opened)
Impeachment of credibility
Three methods of proving character?
Specific acts
Opinion
Reputation
What sort of trait can be introduced? Which cannot
Specific trait which is substantively in issue in the case is OK
General traits are not.
When can bad character be used in a criminal case?
Once the accused introduces evidence of his good character for the pertinent trait in the form of reputation or opinion.
Can the accused introduce character evidence in a criminal trial, as part of a self-defense plea, to show the character of the victim? If no, why? If so, how?
Yes, by reputation or opinion.
If the character of a victim is attacked in a criminal trial, what may the prosecutor generally do? (2)
Show the good character of the victim OR attack the character of the defendant
In a criminal sexual misconduct case, is opinion or reputation evidence admissible to prove consent?
No
In a criminal sexual misconduct case, when are specific instances of sexual behavior of the victim admissible? (3)
When offered to prove that a third party perpetrated the crime.
To show prior acts of consensual intercourse between the victim and accused.
If exclusion would violate the constitutional rights of the accused.
In a civil sexual misconduct case, evidence of the sexual disposition or behavior or the victim is admissible ONLY if . . .
The probative value substantially outweigh the danger of harm to the victim and unfair prejudice to any party.
Previous crimes/acts by D are not admissible during P’s case-in-chief in the only purpose is to prove . . .
When is P allowed to introduce such evidence?
Criminal character or disposition.
When the misconduct is relevant to prove a material fact other than character or disposition (i.e., some relevant issue other than bad character).
What are some examples of issues on which prior misconduct of the accused may be relevant independent of character or disposition (i.e., other crimes or past misconduct may be shown to prove)?
MIMIC + others
Motive Intent Mistake (absence of) Identity Common plan or scheme
Modus operandi (another way to prove identity) Opportunity Preparation Knowledge Lack of accident
Is the MIMIC rule for using other crimes/past misconduct subject to 403?
Yes
When dealing the MIMIC rule for using other crimes/past misconduct, what two questions should you ask yourself?
Independently relevant?
403?
Does MIMIC apply to criminal cases?
Yes, both civil and criminal.
How does the rule for prior acts change when the charges involves sexual assault or child molestation?
Prosecutor/plaintiff can introduce without the door being opened.
In a criminal case, can a prosecution introduce evidence of a prior conviction in his case in chief to suggest that D acted similarly this time around?
No. P cannot introduce character evidence if sole purpose is to show criminal disposition — even priors!
Crim – In what two forms may the D offer evidence of his good character for the pertinent character trait?
Rep or Opinion
Crim – Once D has offered evidence of his good character for the pertinent trait, what methods can P use to counter D’s claims on cross?
Any, specific acts ok here.
Crim – Once D has offered evidence of his good character for the pertinent trait, what methods can P use to counter D’s claims with a new witness?
Rep and opinion only
