21.07.2013 Views

C:\Documents and Settings\thomast\Local Settings\Temp\c.lotus ...

C:\Documents and Settings\thomast\Local Settings\Temp\c.lotus ...

C:\Documents and Settings\thomast\Local Settings\Temp\c.lotus ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE<br />

TITLE 5 - EVIDENCE<br />

CHAPTER 400 - RELEVANCY AND ITS LIMITS<br />

AMEND Rule 5-407 (b) to clarify it, as follows:<br />

Rule 5-407. SUBSEQUENT REMEDIAL MEASURES<br />

(a) In General<br />

When, after an event, measures are taken which, if in<br />

effect at the time of the event, would have made the event less<br />

likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not<br />

admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct in connection<br />

with the event.<br />

(b) Admissibility for Other Purposes<br />

This Rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of<br />

subsequent measures when offered for another purpose, such as (1)<br />

impeachment or (2) proving if controverted, ownership, control, or<br />

feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or<br />

impeachment.<br />

Source: This Rule is derived from F.R.Ev. 407.<br />

REPORTER’S NOTE<br />

The proposed amendment to Rule 5-407 makes clear that the<br />

phrase “if controverted” modifies not only “feasibility of<br />

precautionary measures” but also “ownership” <strong>and</strong> “control.”<br />

-410-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!