Card Set Information
How is relevance of evidence determined? When are certain similar occurrences relevant?
Evidence is relevant if it tends to make the existence of any fact of consequence to the outcome more probably than it would be without the evidence. It must relate to the present litigation.
In certain circumstances past occurrences are relevant:
2.Prior false claims
3.Similar Accidents or Injuries Caused by the same event or condition
4. Previous Similar Acts to prove intent
5. Rebutting claims of impossibility
What are the 4 types of public policy exclusions of relevant evidence
Subsequent remedial measures
Settlement offers and withdrawn guilty pleas (claim and dispute)
Offers to pay medical expenses
What are the two ways to authenticate real evidence?
Testimony from a witness that she recognizes the object as what the proponent claims it to be
Evidence that the object has been in a substantially unbroken chain of possession.
What is the Best Evidence Rule?
The original writing must be produced if it is a legally operative document or the knowledge of a witness concerning a fact results from having read the document
When does the parol evidence rule not bar evidence concerning a contract after its final integration?
An incomplete or ambigous contract
The Party is alleging facts or a mistake that would entitle him to reform the contract
The party is challenging the validity of the contract
What is the difference between a recorded recollection and a refreshed recollection?
A writing used to refresh recollection cannot be read into evidence. A recorded recollection may be read into evidence if the proper foundation is laid. That foundation must include proof that:
The witness at one time had personal knowledge of the facts in the writing
The writing was made by the witness or under her direction
The writing was timely made while still fresh in the witness's mind
The writing is accurate
The witness has insufficient recollection to testify fully and accurately
When is texts and treatises allowed to be read into evidence
When an expert is on the stand and
And the relevant portion is not received as an exhibit
Under the federal rules a witness may be impeached by any party. What are the ways that a witness may be impeached?
Prior inconsistent statements (if extrinsic evidence, ask witness about it at some point)
Presenting evidence of bias (if extrinsic evidence ask witness about bias first)
Conviction of certain crimes
Opinion or Reputation about truthfulness
Dishonest acts (no extrinsic evidence)
When can a witness be impeached by evidence of past crimes?
Any crime involving dishonesty
Felony not involving dishonesty at judges discretion
The crime must not be more than 10 years old or a juvenile offense
When does the attorney client privilege not apply? 3 situations
Attorney's services were sought to aid in the planning or commission of something the client should have known was a crime or fraud
Communications through a deceased client
Communications involving a breach of duty dispute between attorney and client
What is the definition of hearsay? and what are three things that are not offered to prove totma?
A statement uttered by one other than the declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
Verbal Acts or legally operative facts
statements offered to show their effect on the hearer or reading (prove notice)
Circumstantial evidence of declarant's state of mind
What are two exceptions to hearsay?
Previous Statements by a Witness
Admissions by a party opponent
What is the definition of unavailability?
Protected by privilege
Dead or seriously ill
Refuses to testify against court order
Lack of memory
What are the five exceptions to hearsay based on unavailability?
Statement against interest
Statement against party who procured declarant's unavailability
Confrontation Clause Requirements
1. Offered against accused in criminal case
2. Declarant unavailable
3. Testimonial in nature
4. Accused had no opportunity to cross-exam declarant at time
Prosecution demonstrates D's wrongdoing caused unavailability