📚 LAW SCHOOL & BAR EXAM PREP
Law school prep: studicata.com/law-school
Bar exam prep: studicata.com/bar-exam
Free courses: studicata.com/free-courses
❤️ COMMUNITY & REVIEWS
Community: studicata.com/groups/community
Testimonials: studicata.com/testimonials-an...
Submit a review: shoutout.studicata.com
📱 TECH
iOS app: studicata.com/ios
Android app: studicata.com/android
📣 ABOUT
Studicata provides a fresher, more relatable way to prep for law school finals and the bar exam. With top-rated video lectures, exam walkthrough videos, outlines, study guides, strategy guides, essay practice exams, multiple-choice assessments, performance tracking, and more-Studicata has you covered with everything you need to ace your finals and pass the bar exam with confidence.
Email: info@studicata.com
Learn more: studicata.com
🎬 VIDEO INFO
How to Analyze Logical Relevance on an Evidence Essay (FRE 401)
Evidence MUST be logically relevant to be admissible. Under Rule 401 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), evidence is logically relevant if it is both: (1) probative; and (2) material.
(1) PROBATIVE
Evidence is probative if it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. (FRE 401(a)).
For Example (P sues D for negligence resulting in a car accident): Suppose a witness who was present at the scene of the car accident testifies that he is 51% sure that the light was red when the defendant's car went through the intersection. This is probative, because his testimony has a tendency to make the fact that the light was red more probable than that fact would be without his testimony.
However, suppose the witness testifies that he is 50% sure that the light was red when the defendant's car went through the intersection. This is NOT probative, because his testimony does not have a tendency to make the fact as to whether the light was red any more or less probable than that fact would be without his testimony.
(2) MATERIAL
Evidence is material if the fact is of consequence in determining the outcome of the action. (FRE 401(b)).
For Example (P sues D for negligence resulting in a car accident): Suppose a witness who was present at the scene of the car accident testifies that he is 100% sure that he ate pancakes the morning of the car accident. This is probative, because his testimony has a tendency to make the fact that he ate pancakes more probable than the fact would be without his testimony.
However, this is not material, because the fact as to whether he ate pancakes is not of consequence in determining the outcome of the negligence action.
Suppose the witness had a rare pancake allergy that affected his eyesight. Then his testimony would be material, because the fact as to whether he ate pancakes would be of consequence in determining the outcome of the action. The credibility (including sensory competence) of a witness is generally always material.
Learn more: studicata.com