Evidence Flashcards
7 cards from real OR BAR practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Evidence flashcards as text
A plaintiff in a slip-and-fall case seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant store fixed the broken floor tile the day after the accident. This evidence is:
Answer: Inadmissible to prove negligence under OEC 407, but may be admitted for other purposes
OEC 407 bars subsequent remedial measures to prove negligence or culpable conduct, but permits such evidence for other purposes like proving ownership or feasibility.
The plaintiff offers a photocopy of a signed contract when the original cannot be located despite reasonable search. The defendant objects under the best evidence rule. The court should:
Answer: Admit the photocopy; OEC 1004 allows secondary evidence when the original is unavailable
Under OEC 1004, secondary evidence of a document's contents is admissible when the original is lost or destroyed through no serious fault of the proponent.
During settlement negotiations, the plaintiff's attorney offers to accept $50,000 to resolve the case. At trial, defendant offers evidence of this offer. The court should:
Answer: Exclude it; OEC 408 bars evidence of settlement offers to prove liability or damages
OEC 408 prohibits the use of settlement offers and related statements to prove or disprove liability or the amount of a claim.
An attorney seeks to introduce evidence that the opposing party has liability insurance to show the party was careless because they knew they were covered. This evidence is:
Answer: Inadmissible under OEC 411 to prove negligent or wrongful conduct
OEC 411 prohibits evidence of liability insurance to prove that a person acted negligently or wrongfully, though it may be admissible for other purposes.
A defendant in a bar fight case seeks to introduce evidence of the plaintiff's specific prior acts of violence to prove plaintiff was the initial aggressor. As character evidence, this is best offered as:
Answer: Reputation or opinion testimony; specific instances of conduct are barred on direct examination
Under OEC 405(a), when character is admissible, it must be proved by reputation or opinion testimony on direct; specific instances may only be explored on cross-examination.
A defendant regularly took a specific sleeping pill every night before driving home from the night shift. Evidence of this routine is offered under OEC 406. This is:
Answer: Admissible; habit and routine practice are admissible to prove conduct on a particular occasion
OEC 406 allows evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice to prove that conduct on a particular occasion conformed to the habit.
Plaintiff's counsel asks a lay witness, 'In your opinion, was the driver drunk?' The defendant objects that the witness is not qualified as an expert. The court should:
Answer: Overrule; lay witnesses may testify to opinions rationally based on personal observation under OEC 701
Under OEC 701, lay witnesses may give opinions rationally based on their own perception, and observable signs of intoxication are a classic example.
How this page was made: written with AI tools and published by Nathan Beja, founder of Practice Test Geeks, who is responsible for its content. Exam facts are checked against the official sources listed below. Not reviewed by a subject-matter expert. Editorial policy
Sources & references
Exam facts on this page (fees, format, dates, passing scores) are checked against these official sources; the date is our last check. Editorial policy