When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_consistent...

    However, under Federal Rule of Evidence 801 and the minority of U.S. jurisdictions that have adopted this rule, a prior inconsistent statement may be introduced as evidence of the truth of the statement itself if the prior statement was given in live testimony and under oath as part of a formal hearing, proceeding, trial, or deposition. [2]

  3. Huddleston v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddleston_v._United_States

    Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that before admitting evidence of extrinsic acts under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, federal courts should assess the evidence's sufficiency under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b). Under 104(b), "[w]hen the relevancy of ...

  4. Federal Rules of Evidence - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Evidence

    Prior Inconsistent Statement – Rule 801(d)(1)(A): Congress amended the proposed rule so that the "rule now requires that the prior inconsistent statement be given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition. The rule as adopted covers statements before a grand jury."

  5. Course of dealing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Course_of_dealing

    Even though, according to the parol evidence rule, words and terms in a writing intended to be the final expression of the agreement of the parties may not be contradicted by extrinsic evidence of a prior or contemporaneous agreement, extrinsic evidence in the form of course of dealing nonetheless may be used to explain or supplement the writing.

  6. Markman hearing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markman_hearing

    One of the main areas which needed clarification after the creation of Markman hearings was the use of evidence during claim construction. In analyzing patent language, the court can turn to difference sources of information for guidance. [7] These sources were eventually split into intrinsic evidence and extrinsic evidence. [7]

  7. Witness impeachment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment

    A party may impeach a witness for character by cross-examining the witness but not by introducing extrinsic evidence, about specific instances of prior misconduct, often called "prior bad acts," as long as the questions relate to the witness's own character for truthfulness (or untruthfulness) or to the character for untruthfulness of a ...

  8. Phillips v. AWH Corp. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_v._AWH_Corp.

    Extrinsic evidence includes scholarly journal articles and expert testimony. Dictionaries may also be used, but the Federal Circuit repudiated the holding of an earlier case, Texas Digital , that suggested dictionaries could be accorded weight tantamount to the claim language itself.

  9. Recorded recollection - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recorded_recollection

    A recorded recollection (sometimes referred to as a prior recollection recorded), in the law of evidence, is an exception to the hearsay rule which allows witnesses to testify to the accuracy of a recording or documentation of their own out-of-court statement based on their recollection of the circumstances under which the statement was recorded or documented – even though the witness does ...