Abstract
Logically, any code of evidence should start with general rules stating what evidence is admissible and what evidence is inadmissible, and then proceed to the special rules which may further circumscribe this general rule. This method of organization is followed by the Proposed Nebraska Rules of Evidence. The proposed Rules 401 and 402, with respect to the definition of relevancy and admissibility of relevant evidence, may appear very broad, but these rules merely restate present Nebraska law. Rule 403 reflects Nebraska law as stated in Meyer v. Moell, which held that the admission of collateral or cumulative evidence rested within the court's sound discretion. A comparison of Article IV of the Nebraska proposal with the federal proposal reveals they are substantially identical.
Recommended Citation
Lyle E. Strom,
Proposed Relevancy Rules Generally Restate Law,
53 Neb. L. Rev. 365
(1974)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol53/iss3/5