Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)

Citation
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010) 6.
Parent Document
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Effective Date
2010-03-16

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text

536 chars
6.     Evidentiary Issues
       We now turn to Winter’s claim that the district court made improper evidentiary
rulings regarding the admission of testimony at trial. “A district court enjoys wide
discretion in ruling on the admissibility of proffered evidence, and evidentiary rulings
should only be overturned if there was a clear and prejudicial abuse of discretion.”
US Salt, 563 F.3d at 689-90 (internal marks and quotations omitted). “The reason for
[our] extremely deferential standard of review is obvious: A Rule 403 ruling—as