2009International Commentary on EvidenceOpen access

Poetic Justice in Punishing the Evidentiary Misdeed of Knowingly Proffering Inadmissible Evidence

Edward J. Imwinkelried

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The civil procedure rules have been amended to curb pretrial discovery misconduct. The amendments may have deterred some such misconduct. However, the downside has been that the amendments have prompted expensive, time-consuming pretrial hearings which can make it more difficult for a litigant with a meritorious claim to reach trial. In some respects evidentiary misconduct at trial is an even more serious problem than pretrial discovery misconduct. The question is whether we can deter such misconduct without creating an impediment to a fair trial on the merits. To that end, this article proposes that in extreme cases, a litigant should be able to treat an opponent's knowing proffer of inadmissible evidence at trial as proof of the opposition's consciousness of the weakness of their position in the litigation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The civil procedure rules have been amended to curb pretrial discovery misconduct. The amendments may have deterred some such misconduct. However, the downside has been that the amendments have prompted expensive, time-consuming pretrial hearings which can make it more difficult for a litigant with a meritorious claim to reach trial. In some respects evidentiary misconduct at trial is an even more serious problem than pretrial discovery misconduct. The question is whether we can deter such misconduct without creating an impediment to a fair trial on the merits. To that end, this article proposes that in extreme cases, a litigant should be able to treat an opponent's knowing proffer of inadmissible evidence at trial as proof of the opposition's consciousness of the weakness of their position in the litigation.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The civil procedure rules have been amended to curb pretrial discovery misconduct. The amendments may have deterred some such misconduct. However, the downside has been that the amendments have prompted expensive, time-consuming pretrial hearings which can make it more difficult for a litigant with a meritorious claim to reach trial. In some respects evidentiary misconduct at trial is an even more serious problem than pretrial discovery misconduct. The question is whether we can deter such misconduct without creating an impediment to a fair trial on the merits. To that end, this article proposes that in extreme cases, a litigant should be able to treat an opponent's knowing proffer of inadmissible evidence at trial as proof of the opposition's consciousness of the weakness of their position in the litigation.

Key concepts: Misconduct, Jury, Political science, Law, Legislature, Sanctions, Psychology, Criminology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Poetic Justice in Punishing the Evidentiary Misdeed of Knowingly Proffering Inadmissible Evidence — Research Paper | ScholarLens