Specialized Relevance Rules

Question 1

407

Answer 1

When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:

• negligence
• culpable conduct
• a defect in a product or its design; or
• a need for a warning or instruction

But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or – if disputed – proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures

Question 2

408(a)

Answer 2

Prohibited Uses. Evidence of the following is not admissible – on behalf of any party – either to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a contradiction:
(1) furnishing, promising or offering – or accepting, promising to accept, or offering to accept – a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claims; and
(2) conduct or a statement made during compromise negotiations about the claim – except when offered in a criminal case and when the negotiations related to a claim by a public office in the exercise of its regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority.

Question 3

408(b)

Answer 3

Exceptions. The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

Question 4

409

Answer 4

Rule 409. Offers to Pay Medical and Similar Expenses
Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury.

Question 5

410(a)

Answer 5

Prohibited Uses. In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions:
(1) a guilty plea that was later withdrawn
(2) a nolo contendere plea
(3) A statement made during a proceeding on either of those pleas under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 11 or a comparable state procedure; or
(4) A statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resulted in a later-withdrawn guilty plea

Question 6

410(b)

Answer 6

Exceptions. The court may admit a statement described in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4):
(1) In any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together; or
(2)In a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present.

Question 7

411

Answer 7

Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control.

Question 8

differences in 408 & 409

Answer 8

public policies:
–408 encourages settlements
–409 encourages offers to assist
–both avoid lawsuits`

Question 9

Rationale of 409

Answer 9

if you offer to pay bills, you’re covered
if you offer to pay bills AND admit guilt, you aren’t
– highly probative of negligence

Question 10

411 rationale

Answer 10

promotes insurance
prevents fault on improper basis