Cyr v. J.I. Case Co. - 139 N.H. 193, 652 A.2d 685 (1994)

Rule:

N.H. R. Evid. 403 states that although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury.

Facts:

Plaintiff Mark Cyr sustained injuries when a bulldozer backed into him and crushed his leg. Cyr brought a strict liability and negligence action against defendants, manufacturer and seller. A jury returned special verdicts for defendants. Cyr appealed from the judgment, arguing that the superior court erred in admitting evidence of Cyr’s workers' compensation benefits and in excluding expert testimony.

Issue:

Did the superior court err in admitting evidence of Cyr’s workers' compensation benefits?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court reversed, holding that the superior court abused its discretion in admitting evidence that Cyr received workers' compensation benefits because it plainly failed the balancing test of N.H. R. Evid. 403. The court found that the probative value of the evidence to rebut Cyr’s claim of lost wages was substantially outweighed by the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, and misleading the jury. The court also held that expert testimony of a safety consultant regarding a back-up alarm on the bulldozer, which would have allowed the average person in plaintiff's position to avoid the accident and it would have allowed plaintiff to avoid his fate, would not have violated N.H. R. Evid. 702.