Law Outlines Evidence Outlines
Hello! These are my notes and outlines for Evidence, based on the textbook by Sklansky, Evidence: Cases, Commentary and Problems (4th ed.).
The full course outline includes detailed case briefs, along with class discussions. You could use it to excel in cold-calls even if you haven't done the readings.
The exam outline has been pared down. It will be good for persons looking to learn the main points of material before their exam, without worrying about the detailed factual and procedural ...
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Evidence Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Trial Judge’s Discretion; Standard of Review 2
Relevance 3
Probative Value and Prejudice 4
Conditional Relevance 6
Hearsay 6
Nonhearsay Uses of Out-of-Court Statements 7
Implied Assertions 9
Hearsay and Confrontation 9
Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule 12
Prior Statements by Witnesses 12
Admissions by Opposing Parties 12
Direct Admissions 13
Multiple Hearsay 13
Completeness 14
Adoptive Admissions 14
Authorized Admissions 15
Agent and Employee Admissions 15
Co-Conspirator Admissions 16
Admissions and the Bruton Rule 17
Spontaneous and Contemporaneous Statements 18
State of Mind 19
The Hillmon Doctrine 19
Injury Reports 20
Recorded Recollection 20
Business Records 21
Qualifying “Businesses” 22
Sources of Information 23
Absence of Record 24
Public Records 24
Former Testimony 26
Dying Declarations 27
Declarations Against Interest 28
Forfeiture By Wrongdoing 29
Residual Exception 30
Hearsay and Due Process 30
Character Evidence 31
Methods of Proving Character 32
Other Uses of Specific Conduct 34
Permissible Purposes 34
Requisite Proof 36
Character and Habit 36
Sexual Assault and Child Molestation 37
Character of the Victim 37
Character of the Defendant 39
Other Forbidden Inferences 41
Subsequent Remedial Measures 41
Settlement Efforts 42
Civil Settlements 42
Criminal Settlements 43
Medical Payments and Liability Insurance 44
Impeachment and Rehabilitation 44
Character for Untruthfulness 45
Prior Criminal Convictions 46
Admissible and Inadmissible Convictions 46
Preserving Claims of Error 48
Prior Inconsistent Statements 48
Bias and Incapacity 50
Specific Contradiction 51
Rehabilitation 52
Character for Truthfulness 53
Prior Consistent Statements 54
Opinions, Experts, and Scientific Evidence 54
Lay Opinions 55
Expert Testimony 56
Permissible Subjects and Scope 56
Reliability 58
Court-Appointed Experts 58
Judicial Screening of Party Approved Experts 59
Privileges 60
Attorney-Client Privilege 61
Elements of the Privilege 61
Communication 61
In Confidence 62
Between Attorney and Client 63
To Facilitate Legal Service 64
Waiver 65
Crime-Fraud Exception 67
Spousal Privileges 67
Physical Evidence 68
Authentication 68
Best Evidence Rule 71
Scope and Purpose 73
Exceptions 73
(a) In General. The Court must decide any preliminary questions about whether a witness is qualified, a privilege exists, or evidence is admissible. In so deciding, the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege.
(a) Preserving a Claim of Error. Party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the error affects a substantial right of the party and:
(1) if the ruling admits the evidence, a party, on the record: (A) timely objects or moves to strike; and (B) states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from the context; or
Under FRE 103(a)(1), an objection, if its basis is not obvious, is not preserved unless the ground is stated (Bandera).
If party opposing admission did not object, objected on wrong ground, or failed to specify ground, appellate court will reverse only if trial judge’s admission was “plain error.”
(2) if the ruling excludes the evidence, a party informs the court of its substance by an offer of proof, unless the substance was apparent from the context.
(b) Not Needing to Renew an Objection or Offer of Proof. Once the court rules definitively on the record—either before or at trial—a party need not renew objection or offer proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal.
FRE 103(b) provides objection resolved by definitive in limine ruling admitting evidence need not be renewed at trial (Bandera).
(c) Court’s Statement About the Ruling; Directing an Offer of Proof. Court may make any statement about character or form of evidence, objection made, and ruling. Court may direct an offer of proof be made in question-and-answer form.
Courts differ on degree of certainty required to find error harmless.
Questions of law reviewed de novo. Vast majority of factual findings reviewed under abuse of discretion standard.
(d) Preventing the Jury from Hearing Inadmissible Evidence. To the extent practicable, court must conduct jury trial so inadmissible evidence is not suggested to jury by any means.
(e) Taking Notice of Plain Error. Court may take notice of plain error affecting substantial right, even if claim of error was not properly preserved.
Under FRE 103(e), failure to preserve the objection means review is at most for plain error (Bandera).
Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than without evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
The fact to be proven may be ultimate, intermediate, or evidentiary, rather than only “material” (ACN).
The fact need not be in dispute; evidence offered to prove a point already conceded by the opponent should be excluded on the basis of such considerations as waste of time and undue prejudice under FRE 403 (ACN).
Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: US Constitution, federal statute, FRE, or other rules prescribed by Supreme Court. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
Evidence for which there is an innocent explanation is not irrelevant, just less weighty.
Relevance can depend on the purpose for which evidence is introduced, on whether it is a criminal or civil case, and (for character evidence) on who introduces it.
Bandera v. City of Quincy, 344 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2003)
W’s testimony on her own experiences was relevant to show liability on the part of supervisors and pattern of knowing toleration.
W had no “actual knowledge” of what happened to D, and testimony assessing what D reported happened was “wholly inappropriate opinion testimony” (FRE 701), which “...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Evidence Outlines.
Hello! These are my notes and outlines for Evidence, based on the textbook by Sklansky, Evidence: Cases, Commentary and Problems (4th ed.).
The full course outline includes detailed case briefs, along with class discussions. You could use it to excel in cold-calls even if you haven't done the readings.
The exam outline has been pared down. It will be good for persons looking to learn the main points of material before their exam, without worrying about the detailed factual and procedural ...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started