LA Bar Evidence 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under Louisiana law, a witness may be impeached with a prior criminal conviction when the crime:
- Is any misdemeanor committed within the past five years
- Involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the grade of the offense (Correct answer)
- Is a felony where the court admits it after balancing probative value and prejudice
- Directly relates to the same subject matter at issue in the current case
Correct answer: Involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the grade of the offense
Louisiana Code of Evidence Article 609 allows impeachment with prior convictions for crimes of dishonesty or false statement (crimen falsi) without requiring additional balancing.
Question 2: Under Louisiana Code of Evidence Article 202, judicial notice of an adjudicative fact is mandatory when:
- A party requests judicial notice and supplies the court with the necessary information (Correct answer)
- The judge personally knows the fact from prior judicial experience
- The fact is commonly known within the local community
- Both parties submit written stipulations acknowledging the fact
Correct answer: A party requests judicial notice and supplies the court with the necessary information
Article 202 requires the court to take judicial notice when a party timely requests it and furnishes the necessary supporting information.
Question 3: In Louisiana civil proceedings, a plaintiff must typically establish their claims by:
- Beyond a reasonable doubt
- A preponderance of the evidence (Correct answer)
- Clear and convincing evidence
- Substantial evidence
Correct answer: A preponderance of the evidence
The default burden of proof in Louisiana civil cases is a preponderance of the evidence—more likely true than not true.
Question 4: Under Louisiana law, a witness is presumed competent to testify unless the court finds the witness:
- Is under twelve years of age
- Lacks personal knowledge of the matter or lacks the ability to communicate their testimony (Correct answer)
- Has been convicted of a felony within the past ten years
- Is a named party to the litigation
Correct answer: Lacks personal knowledge of the matter or lacks the ability to communicate their testimony
LCE Article 601 establishes a general presumption of competency; disqualification requires a finding that the witness lacks personal knowledge or the capacity to communicate.
Question 5: Under the Louisiana Code of Evidence, a witness's prior inconsistent statement may be used to:
- Prove the truth of the matter asserted in the prior statement in all circumstances
- Impeach the witness's credibility; it is substantive evidence only if it independently qualifies as non-hearsay (Correct answer)
- Establish a hearsay exception automatically because it was made closer in time to the event
- Replace the witness's in-court testimony whenever the witness recants on the stand
Correct answer: Impeach the witness's credibility; it is substantive evidence only if it independently qualifies as non-hearsay
Prior inconsistent statements are primarily tools of impeachment; they constitute substantive evidence only when they independently qualify as non-hearsay under Article 801(D)(1).
Question 6: The 'opening the door' doctrine in Louisiana evidence law allows:
- Either party to introduce any evidence once the first witness has testified on a topic
- A party who introduces evidence on a subject to be met with otherwise inadmissible evidence that fairly rebuts that subject (Correct answer)
- All relevant evidence to be admitted once one piece of related evidence is received by the court
- Physical evidence to be presented before documentary evidence on any contested issue
Correct answer: A party who introduces evidence on a subject to be met with otherwise inadmissible evidence that fairly rebuts that subject
When a party places a matter in issue, the opponent may respond with evidence that might otherwise be inadmissible to prevent a one-sided or misleading impression.
Question 7: Under Louisiana law, which of the following communications is NOT protected by any recognized evidentiary privilege?
- Confidential statements between a penitent and a priest in the context of spiritual counseling
- Statements made in the presence of unnecessary third parties not essential to the privileged communication (Correct answer)
- Confidential communications between spouses made during the marriage
- Confidential statements made by a patient to a licensed psychotherapist
Correct answer: Statements made in the presence of unnecessary third parties not essential to the privileged communication
Disclosure to third parties who are not necessary participants destroys the confidentiality that most privileges require, eliminating privilege protection.
LA Bar Evidence 4
Under Louisiana law, a witness may be impeached with a prior criminal conviction when the crime: