Journal Title
Hofstra Law Review
Volume
46
Issue
2
First Page
641
Document Type
Article
Publication Information
Winter 2017
Abstract
This Article proposes that the final provisions of Rule 407 and 411, which provide a list of examples of permitted purposes for which a court may admit evidence, are asking for trouble--specifically, the trouble that courts will interpret the list not as examples, but as a specially enumerated, exhaustive list of exceptions.
Recommended Citation
Dora W. Klein, Exemplary and Exceptional Confusion under the Federal Rules of Evidence, 46 Hofstra L. Rev. 641 (2017).