Reference no: EM133277093

1. A union filed suit against a corporation, known for its antiunion management, asserting that its members were being discharged in retaliation for membership in the union rather than for any failure to perform their jobs properly. Under the pretrial discovery orders, a union employee was allowed to examine all of the records held in the corporation's files concerning discharge of employees for a seven-year period prior to the instigation of suit by the union. The employee sorted through this large volume of material and discovered that persons who were union activists usually had "lack of corporate spirit" listed as their reason for discharge, while other fired workers tended to have more specific grounds for discharge listed, e.g., persistent lateness. The employee developed a chart showing grounds for dismissal of union members versus nonmembers based on the data in the files. At the trial, the union placed the employee on the stand. She testified in some detail regarding how she had conducted her research. The employee brought out the chart and the union's lawyer asked that the chart be admitted into evidence. The corporation's attorney objected.

How should the court rule on the admissibility of the chart?

a. Admissible, because copies of the original documents upon which the chart was based were available to the corporation prior to trial.

b. Admissible, because the chart is helpful to the trier of fact.

c. Inadmissible, in the absence of the underlying records having been first introduced into evidence.

2. While waiting for a flight, a passenger noticed that whenever a man with a large valise passed close to her suitcase, the Geiger counter inside, which she used in her research to detect small amounts of radiation, would tick. The passenger informed the airport police, who quickly accosted the man, a medical technician. His suitcase contained some expensive radioactive isotopes used in treating certain forms of cancer. The police were aware that the same type of isotopes had been reported missing from a hospital a few days earlier. The man was charged under a federal statute making it a crime to transport radioactive materials without a license. At the trial, an expert witness testifies as to how the Geiger counter operates. Next, the prosecutor calls the passenger to testify regarding the reaction of the Geiger counter to the man's presence.

What must the prosecution show in order for the testimony to be allowed?

a. That the Geiger counter has been held in a substantially unbroken chain of custody.

b. That there was no other radioactive material in the area that could have set off the Geiger counter.

c. That the Geiger counter was in sound operating condition at the time of the airport incident.

d. That the Geiger counter was in sound operating condition at the time of the airport incident.

3. The owner of a small business was injured in a traffic accident. A month after the accident, the owner asked an employee to take a photograph of the intersection where the accident occurred. The employee took the photograph and gave it to the owner, who in turn gave it to his lawyer. The lawyer wishes to introduce the photograph into evidence at trial of the owner's lawsuit against the defendant. The lawyer plans to have the employee testify that he took the photograph. The lawyer also plans to call a witness who lives in the neighborhood of the accident scene and arrived at the intersection shortly after the accident occurred. The witness is willing to testify that the scene in the photograph is in fact the intersection where the accident happened.

Whose testimony is necessary to introduce the photograph into evidence?

a. The employee's testimony is necessary and the witness's is unnecessary.

b. The witness's testimony is necessary and the employee's is unnecessary.

c. The picture is inadmissible.

d. The testimonies of both the employee and the witness are necessary.

4. A defendant is on trial for murder. The only evidence linking the defendant to the crime is some blood found at the scene. The lead detective testifies that an officer took a vial containing a blood sample that had been retrieved by a crime scene technician and drove off with it. The officer is now dead. Next, the prosecution presents as a witness a crime lab chemist. The chemist will testify that he took a vial of blood that contained a label identifying it as having been retrieved from the subject crime scene, and that he performed tests that established a match between that blood and a blood sample taken from the defendant.

Is the testimony of the chemist admissible?

a. Yes, because the chemist qualifies as an expert witness.

b. Yes, because there has been proper authentication.

c. No, because he did not take the original blood sample at the scene of the crime.

d. No, because there is insufficient evidence of chain of custody.

5. A horse breeder offered to sell a colt to his neighbor and they agreed on a purchase price. The horse breeder subsequently received a letter from the neighbor thanking him for the sale and summarizing their agreement. The letter contained the neighbor's alleged signature. When the horse breeder attempted to set up transfer of the colt, the neighbor denied that she agreed to purchase it. In a breach of contract action against the neighbor, the horse breeder offers into evidence the letter. The horse breeder testifies that he is familiar with the neighbor's handwriting and recognizes the signature on the letter as being hers.

Assuming appropriate objection by the neighbor, who claims that she did not sign the letter, how should the trial court rule on the admissibility of the letter?

a. Exclude the letter for lack of foundation because lay opinion testimony regarding handwriting identification is not admissible.

b. Admit the letter but instruct the jury that it is up to them to decide whether the letter is authentic.

c. Exclude the letter unless its authenticity is established by a preponderance of the evidence.

d. Admit the letter as authentic and instruct the jury accordingly.