Relevance

Question 1

Admissibility of Relevant Evidence

Answer 1

admissible unless otherwise provided by Const, statute, FRE, or SCOTUS case law
(irrelevant evidence is not admissible)

Question 2

What is relevant evidence?

Answer 2

Evidence that
1. has any tendency to make a material fact more or less likely than without the evidence AND
2. the fact is of consequence in determining the action
(Rule 401)

Question 3

When can relevant evidence be excluded?

Answer 3

If its prejudicial effect substantially outweighs the dangers of: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence (Rule 403)

Question 4

Factors for considering whether evidence poses unfair prejudice

Answer 4

1. the probable effectiveness of a limiting instruction

2. the availability of other means of proof

Question 5

What is evidence of SRM NOT admissible to prove?

Answer 5

Liability on the part of D for:
Negligence
Culpable conduct
A defect in product or design
A need for warning or instruction

Question 6

Admissible purposes of SRM evidence

Answer 6

1. Ownership & control: P can show D had control or ownership over the instrument
2. Feasibility: P can use the evidence to show that it was feasible (if disputed) for D to remedy a dangerous situation
3. Impeachment: to show an explicit, disputed contradiction (example)

Question 7

When is evidence of settlement/negotiation admissible?

Answer 7

To prove bias or prejudice
To negate accusation of undue delay
Proving an effort to obstruct justice

Question 8

When is evidence of settlement/negotiation inadmissible?

Answer 8

1. To prove the validity or amount of a claim
2. To disprove the validity or amount
3. To impeach a witness’s testimony through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction.

Question 9

When does Rule 408 (settlement negotiations) apply?

Answer 9

Actually in dispute
Matured into a claim
Made during settlement negotiations

Question 10

Exception to 408

Answer 10

conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations concerning a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of its regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority are admissible when offered in a subsequent criminal case

Question 11

Rule 409 - Payment of Med Expenses

Answer 11

paying, offering, or promising to pay medical expenses is inadmissible BUT does not apply to surrounding statements made in conjunction with payment of medical expenses

Question 12

410 - Plea Barganining

Answer 12

Prohibits in both civil and criminal suits:
• A withdrawn guilty plea;
• A plea of nolo contendere;
• Statements surrounding a withdrawn guilty plea or a plea of nolo contendere; and
• Statements made during plea bargaining with a prosecuting attorney.
*Applies to interactions with prosecutor, not police, and in both civil and criminal cases.

Question 13

Rule 410 Exceptions

Answer 13

1. If a party introduces one statement from a plea-bargaining session, another party may introduce additional statements made from the same session when fairness requires consideration for those additional statements. This exception prevents a litigant from creating a misleading impression by introducing selected parts of a negotiation.
2. For perjury prosecutions, the government may introduce evidence of statements otherwise protected when necessary to prosecute a ∆ for perjury or a false statement. (Only if the ∆ made a statement under oath, on the record, with counsel present)

Question 14

Rule 411 - Liability Insurance

Answer 14

Evidence of liability insurance is inadmissible to prove negligent or wrongdoing. Evidence of insurance may be received for other purposes, such as proving agency, ownership, or control of an item or demonstrating bias or prejudice of a witness.