NV Bar Nevada Evidence Law 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under NRS 50.085, which of the following is an improper method of impeaching a witness in Nevada?
- Introducing a prior felony conviction less than 10 years old
- Showing the witness made a prior inconsistent statement
- Presenting extrinsic evidence of a specific act of misconduct not resulting in a conviction to attack credibility (Correct answer)
- Demonstrating the witness has a bias or motive to lie
Correct answer: Presenting extrinsic evidence of a specific act of misconduct not resulting in a conviction to attack credibility
Under NRS 50.085, specific acts of misconduct not resulting in a criminal conviction may only be raised on cross-examination and may not be proven by extrinsic evidence.
Question 2: In Nevada, which of the following statements about the business records exception to hearsay is correct?
- The record must have been made by a government entity to qualify
- The record must have been made at or near the time of the event by someone with knowledge, kept in the regular course of business (Correct answer)
- The exception applies only to financial records
- The exception requires the original author of the record to testify
Correct answer: The record must have been made at or near the time of the event by someone with knowledge, kept in the regular course of business
NRS 51.135 (business records exception) requires the record to be made at or near the time of the event by a person with knowledge, and kept in the regular course of a regularly conducted business activity.
Question 3: Under Nevada law, which of the following is true regarding lay opinion testimony?
- Lay witnesses may never offer opinion testimony under any circumstances
- A lay witness may testify in the form of an opinion if it is rationally based on the witness's own perception and helpful to understanding the testimony (Correct answer)
- Lay opinion is admissible only on questions of value or damages
- A lay witness may give opinion testimony only after being qualified by the court
Correct answer: A lay witness may testify in the form of an opinion if it is rationally based on the witness's own perception and helpful to understanding the testimony
NRS 50.265 permits lay opinion testimony that is rationally based on the witness's own perception, helpful to a clear understanding of the testimony, and not based on scientific or technical knowledge.
Question 4: Under Nevada's physician-patient privilege, which of the following is NOT an exception that would permit disclosure of otherwise privileged medical communications?
- The patient has placed their physical condition at issue in litigation
- The communication was made to enable the physician to act in furtherance of a crime or fraud
- The patient's employer requests the records for an unrelated employment matter (Correct answer)
- The patient is deceased and the disclosure is sought in a proceeding to contest the will
Correct answer: The patient's employer requests the records for an unrelated employment matter
An employer's general request for records for an unrelated employment matter does not qualify as one of the statutory exceptions to the physician-patient privilege under NRS 49.215–49.245.
Question 5: Which of the following best describes the standard for relevance under Nevada Rules of Evidence?
- Evidence is relevant only if it conclusively proves a material fact
- Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence (Correct answer)
- Evidence is relevant only if it directly relates to an element of the claim or defense
- Evidence must be corroborated by at least one other piece of evidence to be relevant
Correct answer: Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence
Under NRS 48.015, evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make the existence of a fact of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
Question 6: In Nevada, which of the following is a correct statement about the admission of evidence of subsequent remedial measures?
- Such evidence is always admissible because it shows the defendant knew of the defect
- Such evidence is inadmissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct but may be admitted to prove ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures (Correct answer)
- Such evidence is admissible in strict products liability cases as an exception
- Such evidence is inadmissible for any purpose in any Nevada civil or criminal proceeding
Correct answer: Such evidence is inadmissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct but may be admitted to prove ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures
NRS 48.085 (mirroring FRE 407) bars subsequent remedial measures to prove negligence or culpable conduct but allows admission to prove ownership, control, or feasibility when those are controverted.
Question 7: Under Nevada law, the psychotherapist-patient privilege protects communications between a patient and a licensed psychotherapist. Which of the following correctly identifies who holds this privilege?
- Only the psychotherapist holds the privilege
- Only the patient holds the privilege
- The patient holds the privilege, but the psychotherapist may also claim it on the patient's behalf if the patient is absent or incapacitated (Correct answer)
- Both the patient and the psychotherapist hold the privilege independently
Correct answer: The patient holds the privilege, but the psychotherapist may also claim it on the patient's behalf if the patient is absent or incapacitated
Under NRS 49.215 and related provisions, the psychotherapist-patient privilege belongs to the patient, but the psychotherapist may assert it on the patient's behalf when the patient is absent or unable to assert it.
NV Bar Nevada Evidence Law 2
Under NRS 50.085, which of the following is an improper method of impeaching a witness in Nevada?