Evidence - Relevance Concepts

Front 1

Limited Admissibility

Back 1

When evidence is admissible for one purpose and inadmissible for another purpose, it is admissible so long as the court restricts the evidence to its admissible scope.

Front 2

Relevance definition

Back 2

Evidence is relevant if it tends to make the existence of any fact of consequence to the outcome of the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Front 3

Evidence general rule

Back 3

Generally evidence must relate to the time, event or person involved in the present litigation.

Front 4

Two step approach to relevance question

Back 4

1) Determine whether it is relevant. 2) Determine whether it should be excluded based on a)judicial discretion(probative substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice b) public policy

Front 5

Exclusion for public policy

Back 5

liability insurance, subsequent remedial measures, settlements, payments on offers to pay medical expenses

Front 6

Exclusion of liability insurance

Back 6

Liability insurance is inadmissible to prove negligence or defendant's ability to pay a judgment. It is admissible to prove anything else

Front 7

Exclusion of subsequent remedial measures

Back 7

inadmissible to prove culpable conduct and/or defective product design. Is admissible to prove defense of no feasible precaution, ownership or control, to impeach or as part of an admission

Front 8

Exclusion of settlement offers and pleas

Back 8

Civil case = inadmissible to prove liability or fault. Criminal -= pleas withdrawn or offers to plea inadmissible to prove guilt. Exception where no claim filed or threatened or no dispute as to liability or damages

Front 9

Exclusion of offers to pay medical expenses

Back 9

Inadmissible to prove liability for injuries in question.

Front 10

When similar occurences are relevant

Back 10

When there are similarities between the evidence and the people & events at issue.

Front 11

Similar occurences: causation

Back 11

Issues of causation may be established by evidence concerning other times, events or persons (damage to nearby homes caused by blasting)

Front 12

Similar occurences: Prior claims or same bodily injury

Back 12

Prior accidents or claim of Plaintiff are usually irrelevant. Exception for pattern of fraudulent claims or pre-existing condition.

Front 13

Similar occurences: Similar accidents or injuries caused by same event or condition

Back 13

Admissible to prove 1) existence of dangerous condition, 2) that defendant had knowledge of the dangerous condition, and 3) that the dangerous condition was the cause of the present injury

Front 14

Absence of similar acts

Back 14

Courts are relutant to admit this evidence, but is admissible to show D's lack of knowledge

Front 15

Previous similar acts

Back 15

Relevant to prove intent of the parties

Front 16

Similar occurences:Prior occurences for Rebuttal

Back 16

Prior occurences may be shown to rebut a claim for impossibility.

Front 17

Sale of similar property

Back 17

This evidence is relevant to establish value when in issue (condemnation or when property was destroyed) Must be similar property, same area and sold at the same time.

Front 18

Habit

Back 18

Habit of a person to act in a certain way is relevant and admissible to show the person acted in accordance with that habit on the occasion. Habit = frequently repeated conduct

Front 19

Routine business practice

Back 19

Relevant to show conduct of the entity was in conformity with that practice.

Front 20

Industrial custom evidence

Back 20

Relevant to prove standard of care in negligence cases.