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).

Share

COinS