...Inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 Federal Rule of Evidence 403 provides, in pertinent part: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its...outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, or misleading the jury. Preventable Accident Determinations 377 Introduction of a safety review...

...admitted. Irrelevant, immaterial, and unreliable evidence shall be excluded. Evidence, even if relevant, may be excluded if its probative value is substantially...danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or if the evidence would be misleading, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time or needless...

...prejudicial or that extrinsic policies justify its exclusion. The basic view is expressed in Rule 403. Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds...Confusion, or Waste of Time. Although relevant, evidence maybe excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,...

...facts or data underlying expert opinion), 90-91, 212 Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Johns, 90-91 Rule 403 (exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time), 67, 210 Rule 406 (habit; routine practice), 106, 210 Rule 803 (hearsay exceptions; availability of...

...Evidence 403 analysis in such a situation, excluding the evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury. The liberality of the federal rules generally resolves all doubts concerning the utility of an expert's...

.... . . Rule 403 permits the exclusion of relevant evidence "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury . . . ." Judge Weinstein has explained: "Expert evidence can be both powerful and quite misleading...

...testimony. Alaska Evidence Rule 403 provided for excluding relevant evidence if its probative value was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury. The state did not show that the probative value outweighed the inherent prejudicial effect of the profile...

...admissible. It still must contain evidence that is more probative than prejudicial. Rule 403 declares, "Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair 3. Fed. R. Evid. 402. 4. Fed. R. Evid. 401. prejudice, confusion of the issues,...

...Generally, relevant evidence is admissible and irrelevant evidence is not admissible.220 However, even where relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risks of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or by considerations of...

...Finally, Rule 403 permits the exclusion of relevant evidence "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury " Judge Weinstein has explained: "Expert evidence can be both powerful and quite misleading because...