Evidence Week 3 - 408 Offers to compromise; Authentication

·       Rule 408 – Offers to Compromise + ALL Statements

o   Foundational Requirements

§  Claim

§  Dispute

§  Offer to Compromise/Settlement Discussion/Statements made during negotiations, by either party

§  Bad purpose (impeachment, liability, amount/validity of a claim etc.)

o   OPPONENT 408 OBJECTION

§  All the foundational requirements of 408 are met here, there is a claim, dispute, a statement that was made during settlement negotiations/an offer to compromise and cannot be offered for the purpose of impeachment, etc.

o   PROPONENT RESPONSE

§  The foundational requirements of 408 are NOT met here because there is no (claim, dispute, statement made during offer to compromise, bad purpose (impeachment, liability, prove validity or amount of a claim))

o   Exceptions

§  Evidence admissible to prove bias

·       EX: one party agreed to settlement terms that will make their testimony at trial more favorable to one side

§  Does not protect pre-existing evidence

·       Authentication – Article IX – Anything with CONTENT (authentication, original document/best evidence, hearsay

o   Authentication

§  Applies to: docs, video/audio, phone calls/handwriting

§  Rule 901

·       Requirement of authentication or identification as condition precedent

·       Satisfied by evidence sufficient to support finding that matter in question is what the proponent claims

§  Types of authentication

·       Stipulation

·       Judicial notice

·       Certifications

·       Witness sponsors

·       Self-authentication

§  PROPONENT RESPONSE

·       The evidence is what we purport it to be and we are able to authenticate/identify it by

o   Distinctive characteristics

o   Handwriting

o   Voice identification

o   Public records

·       Original Document/Best Evidence – Article X – Rule 1001-06

o   Witness account of something’s content is NEVER the best evidence, we want the detail of the original (the thing with content)