In a civil trial for fraud, the defendant seeks to offer evidence of his reputation for being an honest and trustworthy person in the community. The plaintiff objects. Should the court admit this evidence of the defendant's character?
Yes, because evidence of the defendant's reputation for honesty is relevant to disputing the fraud claim.
No, because character evidence is generally not admissible to prove conduct in civil cases except when character is an essential element of a claim or defense.
No, because the defendant failed to provide documentation supporting the claim of community reputation.
Yes, because evidence of good character is often considered in determining credibility.
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, character evidence is generally inadmissible in civil cases to prove that a person acted in conformity with their character on a specific occasion. However, exceptions exist, such as in defamation, child custody, or similar cases where character is directly at issue. In a fraud case, honesty is not a character trait that is in question for the purpose of proving conformity of conduct, so this evidence would not be admissible. Answer choices that suggest otherwise fail to account for this core principle of character evidence rules. For instance, the choice suggesting character is relevant to credibility is incorrect because the admissibility of character evidence focuses on its purpose, not its potential relevance.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are the Federal Rules of Evidence?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are some exceptions to the inadmissibility of character evidence?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is character evidence often excluded in trials?