Evidence Case Briefs

Evidence is a critical upper-level course and one of the most heavily tested subjects on the bar exam. The course focuses on the Federal Rules of Evidence and the body of case law interpreting them, teaching students which information a jury may consider and how attorneys can introduce or exclude it. Key topics include relevance and its limits under Rule 403, character evidence and prior bad acts under Rules 404 and 405, hearsay and its numerous exceptions, expert testimony standards, privileges, and the constitutional right of confrontation.

The cases below cover the essential evidence curriculum. Crawford v. Washington revolutionized Confrontation Clause analysis by replacing the reliability test of Ohio v. Roberts with a testimonial-statement framework. Frye v. United States and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (found in our torts collection) define the two competing standards for admitting expert scientific testimony. Old Chief v. United States illustrates the Rule 403 balancing test in the context of prior convictions. Jaffee v. Redmond establishes the psychotherapist-patient privilege under federal law, and Bourjaily v. United States clarifies the co-conspirator hearsay exception.

Each brief follows standard law-school format — procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, and reasoning — to help you prepare for cold calls, build your course outline, and review before finals. Use these briefs alongside our AI study tools to master the hearsay rule, impeachment techniques, authentication requirements, and the policies underlying evidentiary exclusions.