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
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.