Search for: "Rules of Evidence v. Rules"
Results 1161 - 1180
of 59,609
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Dec 2013, 3:22 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 410(a)(4) states as follows: (a) Prohibited Uses. [read post]
Not That I'm Biased: Court Of Appeals Of Minnesota Misapplies Rule 408 In Automobile Accident Appeal
24 Jul 2009, 4:00 am
Like its federal counterpart, Minnesota Rule of Evidence 408 provides that: Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a... [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 5:43 am
Like its federal counterpart, Arizona Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1) provides that For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or... [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 4:00 pm
Federal Rule of Evidence 410(a)(4) states as follows: (a) Prohibited Uses. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 9:51 am
Like its federal counterpart, Arizona Rule of Evidence 407 provides that When, after an event, measures are taken, which if taken previously, would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to... [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 6:19 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 407 states that When, after an injury or harm allegedly caused by an event, measures are taken that, if taken previously, would have made the injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent... [read post]
10 Oct 2010, 4:55 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2) provides that For the purpose of attacking the character for truthfulness of a witness, (2) evidence that any witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted regardless of the punishment, if it readily... [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 11:17 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 408 provides: (a) Prohibited uses. [read post]
2 Aug 2009, 6:27 am
Tennessee Rule of Evidence 609(a)(3) provides that For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime may be admitted if the following procedures and conditions are satisfied:... (3) If... [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 11:05 am
Like its federal counterpart, Tennessee Rule of Evidence 408 provides that Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering to furnish or (2) accepting or offering to accept a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim, whether in the... [read post]
1 Jan 2011, 6:55 am
Like its federal counterpart, Arizona Rule of Evidence 105 provides that When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not admissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the court, upon... [read post]
10 Apr 2010, 5:52 am
Texas Rule of Evidence 412(a) provides that In a prosecution for sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault, or attempt to commit sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault, reputation or opinion evidence of the past sexual behavior of an alleged victim... [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 10:38 am
" Monsanto Company, et. al. v. [read post]
29 Oct 2013, 7:20 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 703 specifically addresses the bases of an expert witness’s opinion testimony. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 1:48 pm
Werner – a case poised to bring clarity to an issue left open by the high court’s influential 2014 ruling in Tincher v. [read post]
3 Jul 2009, 5:49 am
Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from... [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 5:19 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 5:57 am
In Johnson v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 11:27 am
In Claire's Boutiques v. [read post]
25 May 2008, 2:05 pm
Reports of the ruling, which are often more frustrating than illuminating, can be found here, here, here, and here.Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a copy of the actual ruling online.Based on the reports, it appears that Judge Folsom ruled that the defense had presented sufficient evidence of unlawful command influence for the burden to shift to the government to disprove the existence of unlawful command influence beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
