Seventh Circuit reiterates that rebuttal evidence must “contradict, impeach or defuse the impact of the evidence offered by an adverse party,” in Peals v. Terre Haute Police Dept., 535 F.3d 621 (7th Cir. July 25, 2008) (No. 07-2804)
A recent Seventh Circuit case explained the bounds of rebuttal evidence. Plaintiff Peals filed a civil rights action against a city police department and several officers alleging they conducted an unlawful search, falsely arrested him, initiated a retaliatory prosecution against him, and used excessive force. After the plaintiff and defense presented their cases in chief, the plaintiff asked the court for permission to call a police officer as a “rebuttal witness.”
In a proffer to the trial court, the plaintiff stated that the officer would testify about a prior arrest of the plaintiff to rebut defense evidence. The trial court was unpersuaded since the proffer did not rebut any evidence presented during the defense case. The jury ruled in favor of the defendants.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the additional testimony. The circuit restated the role of rebuttal evidence: “The proper function of rebuttal evidence is to contradict, impeach or defuse the impact of the evidence offered by an adverse party.” Peals, 535 F.3d at 630 (quoting United States v. Grintjes, 237 F.3d 876, 879 (7th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks omitted)). Under this standard, “Testimony offered only as additional support to an argument made in a case in chief, if not offered ‘to contradict, impeach or defuse the impact of the evidence offered by an adverse party,’ is improper on rebuttal.” Peals, 535 F.3d at 630 (quoting Grintjes, 237 F.3d at 879). On the record, the trial court did not err.
The Peals case serves as a useful reminder on the necessity of calling witnesses during a party’s case in chief and limiting rebuttal evidence to that which responds to evidence offered by the opposing party.
Comments
plaintiff
I am going to court today and acting in propria persona. It is a trial and i was wondering if I would be able to call the plaintiff as a rebuttal witness. She did not testify in the first trial. However she begged me not to pull the trailer that was modified by her company because it was unsafe. If her husband says it was safe can i call her to contradict it?
Post new comment