Search Site
Menu

Prejudice, Confusion and Waste of Time

Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and the Massachusetts Guide to Evidence empowers judges to exclude evidence, which may pass the relevancy test (a rule of evidence explored in one of our previous blogs), but nevertheless unfairly biases jurors towards one side or the other, confuses them, or simply wastes the court’s time by raising redundant issues. Unfairly or unduly are the operative words; all evidence is prejudicial but the question in this instance is it unduly or unfairly prejudicial.

Considerations are often based upon: whether the proffered evidence triggers strong emotional reactions from the jurors such they cannot fairly decide the issue before them, whether the evidence is particularly important to establishing elements of the case, whether there is some alternative way to have the evidence admitted, and finally, whether the jury can be given limiting instructions as to how the evidence may be used by them.

The above is a balancing act, which the judge employs. It is the judge’s determination as to whether the probative value is “substantially outweighed” by unfairness, confusion or undue delay. You will notice that the Federal Rules of the Massachusetts Guide insert the additional consideration of substantial, something that not all codified rules of evidence in other jurisdictions require. Again, it is worth keeping in mind that all evidence is prejudicial and that is not the concern. The concern is whether the admitted evidence will lead to unfairness.

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Your email address will not be published.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

    Colleen Santora is the kind of attorney you want in your corner. She is incredibly attentive, sharp, and thorough, but what really sets her apart is that she gets things done. When you have Colleen representing you, you know your case is not going t...

    Read more

    D. Tripp

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Colleen was amazing. I appreciated her professional expertise and her dedication to helping me get a fair settlement. I am so glad she was my attorney and I highly recommend her.

    Read more

    Sophia Elefther

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    My lawyer at this firm was Colleen, she is amazing! Everything was explained to me from the beginning, timeframe was awesome. She is a very knowledgeable lawyer. I would recommend this Law Firm.

    Read more

    Donna Keene

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    I just wanted to drop a quick note to say thank you to Santora Colleen for securing such a great outcome on my wife case. We really appreciate all your hard work, the way you handled the negotiations, and how you kept us informed every step of the wa...

    Read more

    Alexander Foygelman

  • google
    5.0/5.0

    Colleen has been incredibly thoughtful, supportive, and professional throughout every step of our case. She guided us carefully through the process, always taking the time to answer our questions and ensure we understood our options. She consistently...

    Read more

    M Gao

See all reviews
Awards & Affiliations
Contact us

Quick Contact Form

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.