enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Public policy doctrines for the exclusion of relevant evidence

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_policy_doctrines...

    A subsequent remedial measure is an improvement, repair, or safety measure made after an injury has occurred. FRE 407 [dead link ‍] prohibits the admission of evidence of subsequent remedial measures to show defendant's (1) negligence; (2) culpable conduct; (3) a defect in defendant's product; (4) defect in the design of defendant's product; or (5) the need for a warning or instruction.

  3. Federal Rules of Evidence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence

    First adopted in 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence codify the evidence law that applies in United States federal courts. [1] In addition, many states in the United States have either adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence, with or without local variations, or have revised their own evidence rules or codes to at least partially follow the federal rules.

  4. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Criminal...

    Congress also enacted some specific federal rules, beginning in 1790 with provisions included in the first U.S. federal criminal statutes. [2] The result was an incomplete patchwork of state and federal law that the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts did little to fill in, despite seeming authorization under the Judiciary Act to do so. [3]

  5. Evidence (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law)

    Federal Rule 403 allows relevant evidence to be excluded "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice", if it leads to confusion of the issues, if it is misleading or if it is a waste of time. California Evidence Code section 352 also allows for exclusion to avoid "substantial danger of undue prejudice."

  6. Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_consistent...

    However, under Federal Rule of Evidence 801 and the minority of U.S. jurisdictions that have adopted this rule, a prior inconsistent statement may be introduced as evidence of the truth of the statement itself if the prior statement was given in live testimony and under oath as part of a formal hearing, proceeding, trial, or deposition. [2]

  7. Relevance (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance_(law)

    Until the Federal Rules of Evidence were restyled in 2011, Rule 401 defined relevance as follows: "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

  8. Old Chief v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Chief_v._United_States

    Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay ...

  9. Unfair prejudice in United States evidence law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_prejudice_in_United...

    Unfair prejudice in United States evidence law may be grounds for excluding relevant evidence. [1] "Unfair prejudice" as used in Rule 403 is not to be equated with testimony that is simply adverse to the opposing party. [2] Virtually all evidence is prejudicial or it is not material. The prejudice must be "unfair". [3]