Previous Conduct as Evidence

This topic has no further subtopics. Explore its practice questions below.

1. What inference does Rule 130, Section 35 generally prohibit from evidence that someone did something on a previous occa…
2. Which purpose is expressly listed in Section 35 as a possible use of similar-act evidence?
3. Under Section 36, which kind of offer may have the stated effect equivalent to actual production and tender when reject…
4. A party offers a prior act solely to argue, 'She did it once, so she must have done it this time.' No separate relevant…
5. A genuinely relevant previous transaction is offered to show a party's specific knowledge of a disputed process, rather…
6. A proponent offers several earlier incidents and labels them a 'system' identifying the present actor. No reliable conn…
7. A party makes a written offer to deliver a specifically identified instrument. The recipient rejects it for a valid cau…
8. Explain the difference between an improper propensity use of previous conduct and a genuinely relevant use to prove ide…
9. A litigant relies on a vague oral promise to pay 'something later' and invokes Section 36 after rejection. Identify why…
10. In a disputed transaction, counsel argues that a previous act automatically proves the present claim and that identifyi…
11. Does Section35’s prohibition cover using proof that a person did not do an act once to prove the person did not do it o…
12. Is habit expressly among Section35’s listed possible purposes?