Next Generation Bar Exam Quiz
10 questions · no time limit
0:00
EVIDENCE
Question 1 of 10
No time limit
Current
Answered
Flagged
Not seen
PASSAGE
Before trial in a products liability case, defendant moves in limine to exclude plaintiff's expert testimony on an alternative design because the expert never personally tested the design. The court denies the motion, stating: "I will allow the testimony if a proper foundation is laid." At trial, when plaintiff calls the expert, defendant does not object, and the expert testifies about the alternative design. Defendant appeals, arguing that the testimony should have been excluded. The jurisdiction has adopted the following rule and decision:
Rule 103(a)(1): A party may claim error in a ruling to admit evidence only if the error affects a substantial right and, on the record, timely objects or moves to strike and states the specific ground, unless it was apparent from context.
Alvarez v. Cobalt Industries, 520 P.3d 401 (2023): A ruling on a motion in limine is not a final ruling on admissibility unless the court clearly indicates it is final. A party who obtains an adverse preliminary ruling must object at trial when the evidence is offered to preserve the issue for appeal. A continuing objection may be granted at trial, but it must be requested.
Was defendant's challenge to the expert testimony preserved for appeal?
YOUR PROGRESS
10
QUESTIONS
Ready when you are
Answer in any order. Your progress shows here as you go.
QUESTIONS
KEYBOARD
Pick an answer ABCD
Next question ↵→
Previous ←
Flag for review F
Answers save as you go · flagged questions come back at the end