Relevance Flashcards
What makes evidence relevant?
Evidence is relevant if has any tendency to make material fact more probable or less probable than without the evidence
What is the basic relevancy rule for evidence?
- All relevant evidence is admissible
- UNLESS: court makes discretionary determination that probative value of the evidence substantially outweighed by pragmatic considerations
What are the 6 pragmatic considerations that the court may say outweigh allowing evidence?
1) Danger of unfair prejudice
2) Confusion of issues
3) Misleading the jury
4) Undue delay
5) Waste of time
6) Unduly cumulative
What is the general rule about similar occurrences?
If evidence concerns some time, event or person other than that involved in the case at hand, the evidence is inadmissible.
What six situations have produced concrete rules that may permit admissibility for similar occurrences?
1) Plaintiff’s accident history
2) Similar accidents caused by same instrumentality or condition
3) Intent in issue
4) Comparable sales on issue of value
5) Habit
6) Industrial custom as standard of care
Can a plaintiff’s accident history be deemed relevant?
Generally accident history is inadmissible because it shows nothing more than the fact that the plaintiff is accident prone. HOWEVER there is an exception if that is the event that caused P’s injuries.
Explain when other accidents involving the same instrumentality or condition may be admitted? (3 purposes)
1) Existence of a dangerous condition
2) Causation
3) Prior notice
What is ‘intent in issue’ admissible evidence?
Where prior similar conduct of a person may be admissible to raise an inference of the person’s intent on a later occasion. i.e.: gender discrimination, evidence showing no other women hired in the past.
Is evidence showing comparable sale on an issue of value admissible?
Yes it is, selling price of other property of similar type, in same general location and close in time to period at issue is some evidence of property at issue.
Is habit admissible?
Yes, as circumstantial evidence of how the person or business acted on the occasion at issue in litigation.
What defines habit?
Habit is a repetitive response to a particular set of circumstances, it is defined by frequency of conduct and particularity.
What is the NY extra requirement for habit?
There has to be frequency of conduct plus, particularity of conduct and the person also must be in complete control of the circumstances.
Can industrial custom as standard of care be admissible?
Yes, to show how others in same trade or industry have acted in the recent past may be admitted as evidence as to how a party in the instant limitation should have acted: i.e. evidence of 80% of manufacturers installing blade guards on their lawn mowers.
What are the four policy based evidence exclusions?
1) Liability insurance
2) Subsequent remedial measures
3) Settlements of disputed civil claims
4) Offer to pay hospital or medical expenses
Explain the reasons why the existence of liability insurance is inadmissible?
To avoid the risk that jury will base decision on availability of insurance instead of merits of case, and to encourage people to buy liability insurance. EXCEPTION: proof of ownership/control of instrumentality or location or purpose of impeaching
Why are post remedial measures inadmissible for the purpose of proving negligence, culpable conduct, product defect, or need for warning?
To encourage post-accident repairs and to avoid future accidents EXCEPT where it is to show proof of ownership/control.
What is the NY products liability exception to the normal rule that post remedial measures are inadmissible?
Post accident changes are admissible to suggest the existence of a defect in the product at the time of the accident.
In the event of a disputed civil claim, what types of discussions are inadmissible for the purpose of showing liability or impeaching a witness as a prior inconsistent statement?
1) Settlement
2) Offers to settle
3) Statements of fact during settlement talks
EXCEPT, where:
1) settlement evidence admissible for purpose of impeachment on ground of bias; or
2) Statements of fact were made with a government regulatory agency which makes them admissible in later criminal case. (NY hasn’t adopted this)
What plea bargaining instances in criminal cases are inadmissible?
1) Offer to plead guilty
2) Withdrawn guilty plea
3) Plea of nolo contendere (being no contest)
4) Statements of fact made during plea discussions
GUILTY PLEA IS ADMISSIBLE
Why is the fact that the Defendant offered to pay hospital or medical expenses inadmissible to prove liability?
Because we want to encourage charity. Other statements, i.e. statements of fact made in connection with the offer are admissible.
What is character evidence?
Character evidence refers to a person’s general propensity or disposition, e.g: honesty, fairness, peacefulness or violence.
What would three potential purposes for the admissibility of character evidence be?
1) Person’s character an essential element of the case
2) Character evidence as circumstantial evidence of the person’s conduct on a particular occasion
3) Witnesses bad character for truthfulness to impeach credibility
What is the general rule on admissibility of evidence of defendant’s character?
It is inadmissible during the prosecution’s case in chief, however defendant may introduce evidence of relevant character trait during the defense (by reputation or opinion (NY not available) testimony of a character witness) but this opens the door to rebuttal by the prosecution.
So what if the defendant has ‘opened the door’ but calling character witnesses? How may the prosecution rebut?
1) Cross examining the D’s character witness with ‘have you heard’ or ‘did you know’ questions about specific acts that reflect adversely on the trait D introduced
2) Calling their own reputation or opinion witnesses to contradict D’s witnesses (NY reputation only)
3) NY ONLY - the prosecution can also rebut the D’s good character evidence by proving that the D has been convicted of a crime that relicts adversely on the character trait in issue.
