Rule 407: The Repair Doctrine

1
Rule 407The Repair Doctrine
2
Repair Doctrine

• Change which would have made injury-causing event
  less likely
• Made after the injury
• Offered to prove
• Negligence
• Other culpable conduct
• Including defect or lack of warning
• Examples

3
Repair Doctrine 1
Forbidden Inference of Culpability from Repair?
YES
If someone repairs something after incident, it
is SML that it was negligence not to repair it
before the incident.
D fixed hole afterwards
D was negligent
4
Repair Doctrine 2
Forbidden Inference of Culpability from Repair?
No. Inference of ownership OK.
If someone repairs something after incident, it
is SML that he or she owned the property repaired
D fixed hole afterwards
D owned property
5
Repair Doctrine 3
Forbidden Inference of Culpability from Repair?
No. Inference of feasibility OK.
If someone repairs something after incident, it
is SML that it was possible to repair it before.
D fixed hole afterwards
D could have fixed hole
6
Repair Doctrine 4
Forbidden Inference of Culpability from Repair?
No. Inference of existence of condition OK.
If someone repairs a condition after incident, it
is SML the condition existed at the time of the
incident.
D fixed hole afterwards
There was a hole
7
Repair Doctrine 5
If changing a condition changes a result, it is
SML that the condition caused the result.
Connecting Fact
No one has fallen since then
Inference of Causation is OK
Forbidden Inference?
No
Hole Caused the Fall
D Fixed Hole Afterwards