Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Evidence > Relevance > Flashcards

Relevance Flashcards

1
Q

Thayerian view

HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF FRE

A

= evidence having only the slightest probative force is admissible

ADOPTED BY THE FRE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Wigmorean view

HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF FRE

A

= called for a legal relevance test that permitted only evidence with more than a minimum of probative value

REJECTED BY THE FRE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Threshold admissibility

RULE

A

MATERIAL and RELEVANT evidence is admissible if COMPETENT

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Materiality

A

= proposition to be proved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Relevance

A

= link between proof and proposition

AKA probativeness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

3 basic principles of relevance

A
  1. Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence
  2. All irrelevant evidence is inadmissible
  3. All relevant evidence is admissible UNLESS
    a. Some specific exclusionary rule is applicable OR
    b. Judge makes a discretionary determination that the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by pragmatic considerations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

FRE definition of relevance

A

combines materiality and probativeness into a single definition of relevance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

2 KEY ISSUES

to determine if evidence is relevant under FRE

A
  1. Whether the fact sought to be proved is itself in issue under the pleadings and substantive law
  2. Whether the evidence helps to prove the fact for which it is offered
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

2 elements of relevance

A
  1. Materiality

2. Probativeness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Materiality

DEFINITION/MEANING

A

Proposition the evidence tends to prove is of consequence to the case
= is it of consequence to the case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Materiality

2 KEY INQUIRIES

A
  1. What issue is the evidence offered to prove?

2. Is that legal issue material to the substantive cause of action or defense in the case?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Probativeness

DEFINITION/MEANING

A

Evidence has some (any at all) tendency to make that proposition more or less likely
= does it make that proposition more or less likely

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Probativeness

3 KEY INQUIRIES

A
  1. Assuming that the issue the evidence is offered to prove is a material one, is the evidence logically probative of that issue?
  2. Does the evidence tend to prove that issue?
  3. Does the evidence to make the material proposition (issue) more probably true or untrue than it would be without the evidence?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Conditional relevance

DEFINITION + RULE

A

Relevance that depends on a fact

RULE 104(b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Conditional relevance

REQUIREMENTS OF PROOF

A

when relevance of evidence depends on whether a fact exists, proof must be introduced sufficient to support a finding that the fact does exist

RULE 104(b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

All irrelevant evidence is _______

A

INADMISSIBLE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

All relevant evidence is _______

A

ADMISSIBLE unless

a. Some specific exclusionary rule is applicable OR
b. Judge makes a discretionary determination that the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by pragmatic considerations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

INCOMPETENT

A

Some specific exclusionary rule is applicable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

COMPETENT

A

Evidence does not violate an exclusionary rule

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

2 foundations of exclusionary rules

A

Exclusionary rules are founded upon one or more of the following

  1. Policies related to truth-seeking
  2. Policies external to litigation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Truth-seeking policy

BASIS

A

Based on the need to ensure the reliability and authenticity of evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Truth-seeking policy

EXAMPLES

A
  • hearsay rule

- best evidence rule

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

External policy goal

BASIS

A

Need to protect extrajudicial interests of society

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

External policy goal

EXAMPLES

A
  • rules granting testimonial privileges
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Judge makes a discretionary exclusion of evidence

PURPOSE + RULE

A

exclusion of relevant evidence for detrimental impact on trial process

RULE 403

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Types of relevance

A
  1. Pragmatic relevance

2. Policy-based relevance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Pragmatic relevance

A

discretionary exclusion of relevant evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

RULE 403’s

six pragmatic considerations

A
  1. Danger of unfair prejudice
  2. Confusion of the issues
  3. Misleading the jury
  4. Undue delay
  5. Waste of time
  6. Unduly cumulative

RULE 403

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Danger of unfair prejudice

A

Danger that the jury might decide the case on an emotional basis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Confusion of the issues

A

evidence that tends to create a side, separate issue other than one the jury is there to decide

31
Q

Misleading the jury

A

danger that jury will give evidence undue weight

32
Q

RULE 403’s

2 focuses

A
  1. Integrity

2. Efficiency

33
Q

RULE 403’s

primary focus

A

Integrity

34
Q

RULE 403’s

secondary focus

A

Efficiency

35
Q

RULE 403’s

integrity considerations

A
  1. Unfair prejudice
  2. Confusing the issues
  3. Misleading the jury
36
Q

RULE 403’s

efficiency considerations

A
  1. Undue delay
  2. Wasting time
  3. Needlessly presenting cumulative evidence
37
Q

RULE 403’s ANALYSIS

factors

A

Probative value of evidence
VERSUS
Pragmatic considerations

38
Q

RULE 403’s ANALYSIS

balancing test

A

Evidence is inadmissible only if the pragmatic considerations substantially outweigh the probative value

39
Q

RULE 403’s ANALYSIS

what must the parties articulate?

A
  1. What the value of the evidence is in proving the proponent’s case
    AND
  2. How the evidence may cause the jury to return a verdict on an improper ground
40
Q

RULE 403’s ANALYSIS

what will the judge consider?

A
  1. How central is the evidence to the claim or defense
  2. Weigh the significance of the evidence in the context of all available evidence in the case
  3. Account for any alternative means of proving the fact in question
41
Q

Policy-based relevance

A

exclusion of relevant evidence for public policy reasons

= FRE excludes certain evidence of questionable relevance b/c public policy favors the behavior involved

RULES 407-411

42
Q

POLICY-BASED RELEVANCE

4-step analysis for RULES 407-411

A
  1. Identify the social policy or value underlying the rule
  2. Evaluate whether the proposed use of the evidence violates the social policy or value
  3. Determine whether there is an exception to the general rule of exclusion and
  4. Apply an independent 403 analysis to any apparent exceptions

RULES 407-411

43
Q

Types of evidence excluded for public policy reasons

A
  1. Liability insurance
  2. Subsequent remedial measures
  3. Settlements in civil cases
  4. Pleas in criminal cases
  5. Payment of medical expenses
44
Q

Liability insurance

RULE

A

RULE 411

45
Q

Liability insurance

INADMISSIBLE

A

evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible

  1. To prove she acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully
  2. To show ability to pay against a substantial judgment

RULE 411

46
Q

Liability insurance

ADMISSIBLE

A

proof of the fact that the defendant maintained insurance may be used in LIMITED circumstances

  1. to prove ownership/control if disputed
  2. for purposes of impeachment
  3. as part of admission

RULE 411

47
Q

Liability insurance for impeachment

EXAMPLE

A
  • Investigator testifies on behalf of D
  • P may demonstrate bias or interest of this witness by showing she is employed by D’s liability insurance company

RULE 411

48
Q

Liability insurance as part of admission

RULE

A

Only admissible when

  • so coupled with
  • a reference to insurance coverage
  • that reference to insurance cannot be severed
  • without lessening its value as an admission of liability

RULE 411

49
Q

Liability insurance as part of admission

EXAMPLE

A

“don’t worry; my insurance company will pay off”

50
Q

Subsequent remedial measures

RULE

A

RULE 407

51
Q

Subsequent remedial measures

INADMISSIBLE

A

Inadmissible to prove

  1. Negligence
  2. Culpable conduct
  3. Defect in product or its design
  4. Need for a warning or instruction

RULE 407

52
Q

Subsequent remedial measures

ADMISSIBLE

A

Admissible

  1. To prove ownership or control
  2. To rebut claim that precaution was not feasible only if feasibility is disputed
  3. To prove destruction of evidence

RULE 407

53
Q

Subsequent remedial measures

DEFINITION

A

any post-accident repair or design/policy change made in an effort to prevent future accidents

RULE 407

54
Q

Subsequent remedial measures

RULE RATIONALE

A

to encourage people to make such repairs

RULE 407

55
Q

Subsequent remedial measures to prove destruction of evidence
EXAMPLE

A

repainting a fender to cover up evidence of a collision

RULE 407

56
Q

Settlements in civil cases

RULE

A

RULE 408

57
Q

Settlements in civil cases

INADMISSIBLE

A

Evidence of settlement is inadmissible

  1. To prove/disprove validity of a disputed claim
  2. To prove/disprove amount of a disputed claim
  3. To impeach through prior inconsistent statement or contradiction

RULE 408

58
Q

Settlements in civil cases

EVIDENCE

A

Evidence includes

  1. Compromises
  2. Offers to compromise
  3. Conduct or statements made in the course of negotiating a compromise

RULE 408

59
Q

Settlements in civil cases

REQUIREMENTS FOR INADMISSIBILITY UNDER RULE

A
  1. Must be a claim AND/OR
  2. Claim must be disputed as to liability or amount

RULE 408

60
Q

Settlements in civil cases

RATIONALE

A
  1. Public policy favors the settlement of disputes without litigations
  2. Settlement would be discouraged if either side were deterred from making offers by the fear that they would be admitted in evidence
  3. Encourages candor between parties in negotiations

RULE 408

61
Q

Settlements in civil cases

REQUIREMENT OF CLAIM

A

must be some indication, express or implied, that a party is going to make some kind of claim

RULE 408

62
Q

Settlements in civil cases

EXAMPLE OF FAILURE TO MEET REQUIREMENT OF CLAIM

A

Party’s volunteered admission of fact accompanying an offer to settle immediately following the incident
= usually ADMISSIBLE

b/c there has not been time for the other party to indicate an intent to make a claim

RULE 408

63
Q

Settlements in civil cases

EXAMPLE OF FAILURE TO MEET REQUIREMENT OF DISPUTE AS TO LIABILITY OR AMOUNT

A

A party admits liability and the amount of liability but offers to settle for a lesser amount, statements made in connection to that offer
= ADMISSIBLE

RULE 408

64
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

RULE

A 
RULE 410
RULE 408 (allows compromise negotiations to be admissible in criminal proceedings)
65
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

INADMISSIBLE IN CIVIL CASES

A

Inadmissible in any subsequent/pending civil proceeding based on the same facts =

  1. Withdrawn guilty pleas
  2. Pleas of nolo contendere
  3. Offers to plead guilty
  4. Statements made in negotiating such pleas

RULE 410

66
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

ADMISSIBLE IN ANY CASE

A

Admissible in any subsequent proceeding =
- Guilty plea that D does not withdraw

RULE 410

67
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

RATIONALE

A
  1. Evidentiary value of a withdrawn plea of guilty as an admission is deemed offset by the prejudicial effect of the evidence
  2. Judge who permitted the withdrawal must have decided these was good reason to withdraw it = significance of initial plea is minimal

RULE 410

68
Q

Compromise (settlement) negotiations

ADMISSIBLE IN CRIMINAL CASE

A

Admissible when offered in a criminal case =

  • Conduct or statement made
  • during compromise negotiations
  • Regarding a civil dispute
  • With a governmental regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority

RULE 408

69
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

MEZZANATTO WAIVER

A

RULE 410’s protection of plea negotiations may be validly waived UNLESS

  • there is an affirmative indication
  • that the defendant entered the waiver agreement
  • unknowingly or involuntarily
70
Q

Pleas in criminal cases

MEZZANATTO WAIVER EXAMPLE

A
  • D, charged with drug offense, wished to arrange deal with gov in exchange for his cooperation
  • As a prereq to this talk, prosecutor required D
    1. Be completely truthful
    2. Agree that any statements made by him in the course of plea negotiations could be used to impeach him if he testified in a contrary fashion at trial
  • D agreed
  • If discussion breaks off after and D is tried on charges = prosecutor may use statements made in plea negotiations to impeach D
71
Q

Payment of medical expenses

RULE

A

RULE 409

72
Q

Payment of medical expenses

INADMISSIBLE

A

Inadmissible =

  • Evidence that a party paid or offered to pay the injured party’s medical expenses
  • To prove liability for the injury

NOTE = don’t need to show that there is a disputed claim

RULE 409

73
Q

Payment of medical expenses

ADMISSIBLE

A

Admissions of fact accompanying offers to pay medical expenses

RULE 409

74
Q

Payment of medical expenses

RATIONALE

A

to encourage that kind of charity

RULE 409

Evidence (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions