MBE Multistate Bar Examination
Evidence 2025 Exam Review Questions
and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
David Mungai
[COMPANY NAME] [Company address]
, MBE Multistate Bar Examination
Evidence 2025 Exam Review Questions
and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
What is Evidence Law? - Answer>> The law of evidence is a
system of rules and standards that regulate the admission of
proof (evidence) in a court proceeding. In other words, the
important facts of the case are determined by proof that is
filtered through the applicable rules of evidence and determined
to
be either admissible or inadmissible. This proof includes
testimony, writings, physical objects, and anything else presented
to the senses of the jury. Such proof can be direct or
circumstantial in nature.
What Law Applies on the Bar Exam? - Answer>> The Federal
Rules of Evidence govern on the Multistate Bar Examination
("MBE").
Minor caveat: There are a few situations where federal courts will
apply state law (for example, with respect to privilege in a
diversity case).
Applicability of Federal Rules - Answer>> We know that the
Federal Rules control on the bar exam, but you
might encounter an exam question about whether they apply in a
particular federal proceeding. The Federal Rules are generally
appli-
cable in all civil and criminal federal proceedings. However, there
are
certain types of proceedings (listed below) where the judge or jury
is permitted to consider more information than would be
admissible
under the Federal Rules.
,When Federal Rules Do Not Apply
Except for rules relating to privilege, the Federal Rules do not
apply in: (1) the court's determination of a preliminary question of
fact relating to admissibility (we'll cover this in the final module on
Procedural Considerations); (2) grand jury proceedings; and (3)
other miscellaneous proceedings, including those involving
sentencing,
extradition, issuing an arrest or search warrant, preliminary
examination in a criminal case, bail, and probation.
Definition of Relevance - Answer>> Evidence is relevant if it
has any tendency to make the existence of any fact of
consequence to the determination of the action more probable or
less probable than it would be without the evidence. In
other words, for evidence to be relevant, it must be:
- Material—that is, the proposition must be "of consequence" in
the case (though it does not need to be the ultimate issue); and
- Probative—meaning, the evidence has "any" tendency to make
the proposition more or less likely
This is a threshold question, and a low bar to overcome.
General Rule of Admissibility - Answer>> Irrelevant evidence is
always inadmissible. All relevant evidence is admissible, unless:
- It is kept out by some specific exclusionary rule of evidence that
you will be learning about in subsequent modules (hearsay,
privilege, public policy exclusions, etc.); or
- The court uses its Rule 403 discretion to keep it out (see below)
Rule 403 (Court's Discretion to Exclude Relevant Evidence) -
Answer>> A trial judge has broad discretion to exclude relevant
evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the
danger of one or more of the following considerations:
- Danger of unfair prejudice (there is a danger that the jury will
decide the case on an emotional basis)
- Confusion of the issues (the evidence creates a side issue)
, - Misleading the jury (there is a danger that the jury will give
undue weight to the evidence)
- Undue delay
- Waste of time
- Needless presentation of cumulative (repetitive) evidence
Under the Federal Rules, unfair surprise is not a valid ground
upon which to exclude relevant evidence.
Note: You'll encounter a few isolated situations where the judge
must use a different balancing test to determine whether evidence
is admissible, but Rule 403 is the standard balancing test for most
evidence.
Similar Occurences - Answer>> As a general rule, if evidence
involves some time, event, or person other than that involved in
the present case, it is inadmissible. The rationale is that the
evidence often does not survive the Rule 403 balancing test; in
other words, the relevance is weak to begin with
and the probative value is substantially outweighed by pragmatic
considerations (for example, the dangers of confusing the issues,
misleading the jury, or wasting time).
Despite the general rule above, some recurring situations have
produced concrete rules that may allow prior similar occurrences
to be
admitted. The following are examples of relevant similar
occurrences:
Plaintiff's Accident History—Prior False Claims or Same Bodily
Injury
Similar Accidents or Injuries Caused by Same
Event or Condition
Previous Similar Acts Admissible to Prove Intent
Sales of Similar Property
Rebutting Claim of Impossibility
Evidence 2025 Exam Review Questions
and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
David Mungai
[COMPANY NAME] [Company address]
, MBE Multistate Bar Examination
Evidence 2025 Exam Review Questions
and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
What is Evidence Law? - Answer>> The law of evidence is a
system of rules and standards that regulate the admission of
proof (evidence) in a court proceeding. In other words, the
important facts of the case are determined by proof that is
filtered through the applicable rules of evidence and determined
to
be either admissible or inadmissible. This proof includes
testimony, writings, physical objects, and anything else presented
to the senses of the jury. Such proof can be direct or
circumstantial in nature.
What Law Applies on the Bar Exam? - Answer>> The Federal
Rules of Evidence govern on the Multistate Bar Examination
("MBE").
Minor caveat: There are a few situations where federal courts will
apply state law (for example, with respect to privilege in a
diversity case).
Applicability of Federal Rules - Answer>> We know that the
Federal Rules control on the bar exam, but you
might encounter an exam question about whether they apply in a
particular federal proceeding. The Federal Rules are generally
appli-
cable in all civil and criminal federal proceedings. However, there
are
certain types of proceedings (listed below) where the judge or jury
is permitted to consider more information than would be
admissible
under the Federal Rules.
,When Federal Rules Do Not Apply
Except for rules relating to privilege, the Federal Rules do not
apply in: (1) the court's determination of a preliminary question of
fact relating to admissibility (we'll cover this in the final module on
Procedural Considerations); (2) grand jury proceedings; and (3)
other miscellaneous proceedings, including those involving
sentencing,
extradition, issuing an arrest or search warrant, preliminary
examination in a criminal case, bail, and probation.
Definition of Relevance - Answer>> Evidence is relevant if it
has any tendency to make the existence of any fact of
consequence to the determination of the action more probable or
less probable than it would be without the evidence. In
other words, for evidence to be relevant, it must be:
- Material—that is, the proposition must be "of consequence" in
the case (though it does not need to be the ultimate issue); and
- Probative—meaning, the evidence has "any" tendency to make
the proposition more or less likely
This is a threshold question, and a low bar to overcome.
General Rule of Admissibility - Answer>> Irrelevant evidence is
always inadmissible. All relevant evidence is admissible, unless:
- It is kept out by some specific exclusionary rule of evidence that
you will be learning about in subsequent modules (hearsay,
privilege, public policy exclusions, etc.); or
- The court uses its Rule 403 discretion to keep it out (see below)
Rule 403 (Court's Discretion to Exclude Relevant Evidence) -
Answer>> A trial judge has broad discretion to exclude relevant
evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the
danger of one or more of the following considerations:
- Danger of unfair prejudice (there is a danger that the jury will
decide the case on an emotional basis)
- Confusion of the issues (the evidence creates a side issue)
, - Misleading the jury (there is a danger that the jury will give
undue weight to the evidence)
- Undue delay
- Waste of time
- Needless presentation of cumulative (repetitive) evidence
Under the Federal Rules, unfair surprise is not a valid ground
upon which to exclude relevant evidence.
Note: You'll encounter a few isolated situations where the judge
must use a different balancing test to determine whether evidence
is admissible, but Rule 403 is the standard balancing test for most
evidence.
Similar Occurences - Answer>> As a general rule, if evidence
involves some time, event, or person other than that involved in
the present case, it is inadmissible. The rationale is that the
evidence often does not survive the Rule 403 balancing test; in
other words, the relevance is weak to begin with
and the probative value is substantially outweighed by pragmatic
considerations (for example, the dangers of confusing the issues,
misleading the jury, or wasting time).
Despite the general rule above, some recurring situations have
produced concrete rules that may allow prior similar occurrences
to be
admitted. The following are examples of relevant similar
occurrences:
Plaintiff's Accident History—Prior False Claims or Same Bodily
Injury
Similar Accidents or Injuries Caused by Same
Event or Condition
Previous Similar Acts Admissible to Prove Intent
Sales of Similar Property
Rebutting Claim of Impossibility
