Public Policy Exclusions

Question 1

Public Policy Exclusions: Rationale

Answer 1

certain evidence, even though it may be relevant, is nonetheless excluded by the Federal Rules because public policy favors the behavior involved. If such evidence were routinely admissible in court, it could dissuade people from doing these things in the first place.

Question 2

Liability Insurance

Answer 2

Evidence of a party’s insurance against liability (or lack thereof) is not admissible to show whether party acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully (inadmissible to prove fault or absence of fault). However, may be admissible to:
(1) prove ownership or control, if disputed
(2) impeach a witness (usually to show bias) or
(3) as part of an admission of liability, where the reference to insurance coverage cannot be severed without lessening its probative value as an admission of liability (ex: “Don’t worry, may inusrance will pay it off”)

Question 3

Subsequent Remedial Measures

Answer 3

Evidence of repairs or other precautionary measures made following an injury is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product or design, or a need for a warning or instruction. However, may be admissible for some other relevant purpose:
(1) to prove ownership or control, if disputed
(2) to rebut a claim that a precaution was not feasible or
(3) to prove that the opposing party has destroyed evidence

Question 4

Civil Settlements and Settlement Negotiations

Answer 4

Evidence of a comprimise (settlement) or an offer to conpromise a civil claim is not admissible in any case to:
(1) prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or
(2) impeach a witness by prior inconsistent statement or contradiction
Conduct or statements made in course of negotiating a compromise – including direct admissions of liability – are also inadmissible for these purposes

Note: evidence of settlement is admissible to impeach witness on ground of bias

Question 5

Civil Settlements/Negotiations

Disputed Claim Required

Answer 5

The settlement public policy exclusion only applies if there was a claim or some indication that a party was going to make a claim (although the party need not have actually filed suit). The claim must have been in dispute as to either (1) liability or (2) amount

Question 6

Civil Settlement/Negotiations

Limited Exception to Rule: Civil Dispute w/Government Authority

Answer 6

Under Federal Rules, conduct or statements made during compromise negotiations regarding civil dispute w/governmental regulatory, investigatory, or enforcement authority are **not excluded when offered in a criminal case **

Question 7

Plea Discussions

Answer 7

The following are generally inadmissible in any criminal or civil case against the D who made the plea or participated in the discussions:
- offers to plead guilty;
- withdrawn guilty pleas;
- actual pleas of nolo contendere; or
- statements of fact made during any of the above plea discussions

Note: an actual guilty plea (not withdrawn) is generally admissible in related litigation as a statement of an opposing party (see Hearsay)

Question 8

Payments of and Offers to Pay Medical Expenses

Answer 8

evidence that a party has paid or offered to pay an injured person’s medical, hospital, or similar expenses is inadmissible to prove liability for injury. However, admissions of fact accompanying such payments and offers are admissible

Distinguish from settlement negotiations where admissions of fact are not admissible. NOTE: beware of an offer to pay medical expenses that is also an offer to settle (I’ll pay your medical expenses if you drop the case). In this situation, the more restrictive rule for settlement negotiations applies; meaning any accompanying statements or conduct would be excluded along with the offer