Quiz 12

• In a civil case, after the plaintiff presented her evidence-in-chief, the defendant waived his right to present evidence. The court, motu proprio, ordered the plaintiff to present rebuttal evidence.

• Did the court act properly in ordering the plaintiff to present rebuttal evidence?

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

Answer explanation

• No, the court did not act properly. Rebuttal evidence is presented to counter new matters raised by the defendant in their evidence-in-chief. Since the defendant waived the presentation of evidence, there was no new matter to rebut. The court cannot compel a party to present rebuttal evidence when there is nothing to rebut.

• During trial, Plaintiff RR's counsel formally offered a document, a purported email exchange between Plaintiff RR and Defendant SS, as Exhibit "A." In making the offer, counsel stated that the email exchange demonstrated Defendant SS's admission of liability. Defendant SS's counsel objected to the admissibility, arguing lack of proper authentication as the email headers were incomplete and no witness testified to their authenticity. The court admitted the email exchange "subject to the objection." Later, in its judgment, the court stated that while Exhibit "A" was admitted, it accorded it minimal weight because the lack of complete headers and authentication made its reliability questionable.

  Did the Court act correctly in (a) admitting the email exchange "subject to the objection," and (b) subsequently according it minimal weight in its judgment?

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

Answer explanation

• Admitting the email exchange "subject to the objection": Yes, the court has the discretion to admit evidence "subject to the objection." This allows the trial to proceed while noting the admissibility issue for later consideration. It doesn't necessarily mean the evidence will ultimately be given full probative value.

  According it minimal weight: Yes, the court acted correctly. Admissibility and weight are distinct. Even if admitted, the court, as the trier of fact, assesses the probative value of the evidence. The stated reasons – incomplete headers and lack of thorough authentication – directly impact the reliability and thus the weight the court should give to the email exchange. The court properly considered the concerns raised in the objection when evaluating the evidence for its persuasive value.

• In a case involving a complex real estate transaction, the court, over the objection of both parties, referred the case to a commissioner to receive evidence and submit a report. The court believed that the commissioner could more efficiently examine the voluminous documents and conflicting claims.

• Did the court act properly in referring the case to a commissioner?

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

Answer explanation

• No, the court did not act entirely properly. While the court has the power to appoint a commissioner, the consent of both parties is required, save in certain instances. Unless the case involves questions of fact requiring extensive examination of documents or accounts, or the elicitation of testimony, the court needs the consent of both parties to refer a case to a commissioner. In this case, the court should have considered the parties' objections, unless the situation fell under the exceptions where consent is not needed.

• In a breach of contract case, the defendant, in its demurrer to evidence, argued that even if the plaintiff's evidence is admitted to be true, the facts do not constitute a valid cause of action.

• Is this a proper argument in a demurrer to evidence?

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

Answer explanation

Yes, this is a proper argument. A demurrer to evidence essentially tests the sufficiency of the plaintiff's evidence. It hypothetically admits the truth of the plaintiff's evidence but argues that such evidence is insufficient to support a judgment in the plaintiff's favor.

• In a civil case, after the plaintiff had presented all its documentary evidence but before any of its witnesses testified, the defendant filed a demurrer to evidence, arguing that the documents did not sufficiently establish the plaintiff's claim.

• Did the defendant file the demurrer to evidence at the proper time?

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

Answer explanation

• No, the defendant did not file the demurrer to evidence at the proper time. A demurrer to evidence in a civil case is filed after the plaintiff has completed the presentation of all of its evidence, both documentary and testimonial.