Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/723421.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
Full Text
1,796 charsAll relevant evidence is admissible. ER 402; Medcalf v. Dep't of
Licensing. 83 Wn. App. 8, 16, 920 P.2d 228 (1996), affd, 133
Wn.2d 290, 944 P.2d 1014 (1997). "Relevant evidence" is
"evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact
that is of consequence to the determination of the action more
probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."
ER 401; Medcalf. 83 Wn. App. at 16. Evidence tending to establish
a party's theory, or to qualify or disprove the testimony of an
adversary, is relevant evidence. Lamborn v. Phillips Pac. Chem.
Co., 89 Wn.2d 701, 706, 575 P.2d 215 (1978); Maicke v. RDH. Inc..
37 Wn. App. 750, 752, 683 P.2d 227 (1984).
Haves v. Wieber Enters.. Inc., 105 Wn. App. 611, 617, 20 P.3d 496 (2001).
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is
substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. ER 403. "Evidence
may be unfairly prejudicial under ER 403 if it is evidence 'dragged in' for the sake
of its prejudicial effect or is likely to trigger an emotional response rather than a
rational decision among the jurors." Haves. 105 Wn. App. at 618 (citing Carson
v. Fine. 123 Wn.2d 206, 223-24, 867 P.2d 610 (1994)). "The ability of the danger
12
No. 72342-1-1/13
of unfair prejudice to substantially outweigh the probative force of evidence is
'quite slim' where the evidence is undeniably probative of a central issue in the
case." Carson. 123 Wn.2d at 224 (quoting United States v. 0.161 Acres of Land.
837 F.2d 1036, 1041 (11th Cir. 1988)). "[T]he burden of showing prejudice is on
the party seeking to exclude the evidence." Carson. 123 Wn.2d at 225.
"ER 403 must be administered in an evenhanded manner." Carson. 123