Unfair prejudice definition

Unfair prejudice means an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one. “Unfair prejudice” may also arise from evidence or testimony that may be persuasive because of its strongly misleading or confusing nature.

Unfair prejudice within its context means an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one.

Unfair prejudice means a tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis or to divert the jury’s attention away from its duty of weighing the evidence impartially.

Examples of Unfair prejudice in a sentence

• Unfair prejudice "speaks to the capacity of some concededly relevant evidence to lure the factfinder into declaring guilt on a ground different from proof specific to the offense charged." Old Chief v.

• It is argued that national the specificity of intellectual capital might not be revealed by models created to explain busi- ness resources.

• Unfair prejudice exists when there is a tendency that the evidence will be given undue or preemptive weight by the jury, or when it would be inequitable to allow the use of the evidence.

• Pursuant to FRE 403, relevant evidence may be excluded where its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of: (1) Unfair prejudice (2) Confusion of issues (3) Misleading the jury The use of this rule is not common in Tax Court because there is no jury, the Tax Court judge is not likely to be confused by the issues, and the Tax Court discovery and stipulation process largely avoids the opportunity for a party to introduce potentially prejudicial evidence.

• Unfair prejudice exists when there is a tendency that the evidence will be given undue or preemptive weight by the jury, or when it would be inequitable to allow use of the evidence.

More Definitions of Unfair prejudice

Unfair prejudice within its context means an undue tendency to suggest [a]

Unfair prejudice means ‘a tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis or to divert the jury’s attention away from its duty of weighing the evidence impartially.’” Castellani v. Scranton Times, L.P., 124 A.3d 1229, 1245 (Pa. 2015), citing Pa.R.E. 403 (comment). Furthermore,

Unfair prejudice means a tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis or to divert the jury’s attention away from its duty of weighing the evidence impartially.” Id. at Comment. “The function of the trial court is to balance the alleged prejudicial effect of the evidence against its probative value and it is not for an appellate court to usurp that function.” Parr v. Ford

Unfair prejudice. * * * means an undue tendency to suggest a decision on an improp- er basis * * *. [It] describes a situation in which the preferences of the trier of fact are affected by reasons essentially unrelated to the persuasive power of the evidence to es- tablish a fact of consequence.’’ State v. Lyons, 324 Or. 256, 280, 924 P.2d 802 (1996).

Unfair prejudice means a tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis or to divert the jury's attention away from its duty of weighing the evidence impartially.” Id. Cmt.

Unfair prejudice. ... means an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis ....” Steger v. General Electric Co., 318 F.3d 1066, 1079 (11th Cir. 2003)(internal quotes omitted). Since Block has not established any impropriety in ABS’s reliance of the November 3 and December 17 repetitions of the multiplier proposal, their usage cannot be “unfair” for purposes of Rule 403.15

Unfair prejudice means a “tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis or divert the jury’s attention away from its duty of weighing the evidence impartially.” Com v. Wright, 961 A.2d 119, 151 (Pa. 2008); Official Comment; Bernstein, 2009 Pa. Rules of Evidence, Comment 4 to Pa.R.E. 403 (Gann) (prejudicial evidence is “more likely to direct the jury’s attention to matters of no consequence”). Additionally, evidence that confuses the issues is inadmissible, even if relevant, if the evidence would lead to litigation of collateral issues that will distract the jury. See, e.g., Mansour v. Linganna, 787 A.2d 443, 448 (Pa. Super. 2001), appeal denied, 796 A.2d 984 (Pa. 2002); Daset Mining Corp. v. Industrial Fuels Corp., 473 A.2d 584