FRE · Rule 407
FRE Rule 407 deals with the admissibility of evidence regarding subsequent remedial measures and their implications in civil proceedings.
Source: FRE Rule 407
When, after an injury or harm allegedly caused by an event, measures are taken that would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product or its design, or a need for warning or instruction.
FRE Rule 407 states that if a party takes actions to improve safety or avoid future harm after an incident, those actions cannot be used to show that the party was negligent or at fault in the first place. This aims to encourage parties to make improvements without fear that their actions will be used against them in court.
The purpose of this rule is to promote public policy favoring safety improvements and taking remedial actions that benefit society, minimizing the disincentive on parties to remedy their conduct.
Evidence of subsequent remedial measures cannot be used to prove fault but may be admissible for other purposes, such as proving ownership or control.
In this case, the court held that evidence of subsequent remedial measures taken by the defendant was inadmissible to establish liability, reinforcing the principle behind FRE 407.
On exams, FRE Rule 407 may be tested in the context of hypothetical fact patterns involving post-accident safety measures, so be prepared to identify its implications on admissibility.