Search Site
Menu

Relevant Evidence

Although all evidence introduced by a lawyer must be considered “relevant evidence” before it can be admitted, many lawyers today would nevertheless struggle to give an adequate legal definition of the word “relevancy”. According to the Advisory Committee’s notes in drafting Rule 401 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the proper definition is in the form of a question, which is “whether [the] item of evidence, when tested by the processes of legal reasoning, possesses sufficient probative value to justify receiving it in evidence”. The Advisory Committee further noted that this question must be satisfied by testing whether or not the evidence would tend to make the existence of a consequential fact of the case “more or less probable”. The Committee described the standard of probability as simply anything that made the fact “more or less probable than it would be without the evidence”. The Committee went on to cite the legal authority on evidence, McCormick, who stated: “A brick is not a wall”, meaning the evidence just has to contribute in some way to the matter for which it is being introduced.

This of course led to a second problem, though, which is that of conditional relevancy. What if the evidence’s contribution of probability towards one fact is contingent on some other fact? Rule 104(b), on preliminary questions of the court, considers this to be a question for the jury to decide. A judge would pose the question to the jury as “[evidence in dispute] may only be considered if you find the existence of [this other fact] to be true”. That kind of legal charge to the jury invokes the concept which had been discussed in a previous blog on the need for foundational proof.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feinberg & Alban, P.C. fervently protects your rights
  • The Boston firm of Feinberg & Alban, P.C. specializes its practice in the area of personal injury.

    The attorneys serve the entire state of Massachusetts in addition to affiliating with lawyers in other states to handle cases outside of Massachusetts.

  • $7.7 Million Award for Feinberg & Alban Client in Personal Injury Trial

    Boston Attorneys Win Highest Injury Verdict in Massachusetts in 2011 & 2012.

Client Reviews
  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Choosing Feinberg & Alban was probably one of the best decisions I ever took. Robert Feinberg and Perry Feinberg are amazing in their professionalism as well as in compassion. Perry was the lead attorney for me. He was always responsive to any questi...

    Read more

    Raja Bhattacharyya

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I would like to express my gratitude to Feinberg & Alban PC. They are great people and professionals. If you need an attorney these are your guys. Thank you so much! Tatiana

    Read more

    Tatiana Andreeva

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    It was unbelievable!! I got into a motorcycle accident didn’t remember a thing when I woke up I was in the hospital and very terrified I thought to myself I think I need a lawyer I started looking online and I came across this law firm let me tel...

    Read more

    Vin Loco

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Colleen Santora helped immensely in every step along the way of my fight against the insurance company regarding my property damage and injuries sustained. I'm grateful and would recommend Colleen to anyone! Thanks

    Read more

    DatDude Lex

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    When I was in a car accident, my husband and I searched for a good injury lawyer to represent me After talking to several law firms, we found Feinberg & Alban. The moment we finished talking with Robert and Perry Feinberg, both my husband and I immed...

    Read more

    Jayashree Banerjee

See all reviews
Awards & Affiliations
Contact us

Quick Contact Form