We're about to move into the realm of specialized relevance and we're going to study five rules in particular. In this module I'm going to emphasize three things. First, how these five rules are special rules where Congress and the Advisory Committee determined that as a matter of law these particular types of evidence fail the 403 balancing test.
Second, I'm going to mention and refer briefly to each of these five rules. And third, I'm going to stress how these are rules of limited exclusion. They only ban this evidence if offered for very particular purposes.
We are now moving into the world of specialized relevance. Pieces of evidence that is a matter of law simply fail the 403 balancing test. Because of that, new specialized tests were developed to govern admissibility. These rules...
rules 407 through 411 are tremendously complex, and I believe that their complexity greatly exceeds their importance. All of these rules deal with evidence that have very little probative value and at least some potential for prejudice, which is why the advisory committee and Congress developed these rules in the first place. I've come up with a mnemonic device, which I think should help you remember these five rules. The mnemonic device is SAPPI.
S-A-P-P-I. Though of course it's not a SAPPI mnemonic device. Here they are.
First subsequent remedial measures under Rule 407. Second attempts to compromise or compromises with respect to a disputed claim under Rule 408. Third payments or offers to pay medical expenses under 409. Fourth, pleas- not in the terms of pleas, but in the terms of plea bargains, under Rule 410. And fifth, insurance, or the lack thereof, for liability under Rule 411. Now four of these five rules are rules of limited exclusion. They ban evidence only if offered for a particular purpose. If the evidence is offered for a different valid purpose, they survive the rule and must be subject to Rule 403. One of these five rules, Rule 410, which governs plea bargains, is a rule of broad exclusion, and we'll focus on that a few modules down the line.
You've just watched our module on introducing the specialized relevance rules under Rules 407 through 411. I stressed three points. First, these rules deal with situations where the advisory committee and Congress determine that the particular piece of evidence has such limited probative value and such a risk for prejudice that they created special rules to exclude evidence. Second, I briefly introduced each of the five rules.
And third, I mentioned how four of the five rules are rules of limited exclusion. And one of the rules, Rule 410, is a rule of broad exclusion.