Which types of evidence are generally excluded for public policy reasons?

Certain types of evidence are excluded in legal proceedings for public policy reasons because allowing this evidence could undermine the fairness of the judicial process or discourage parties from engaging in certain activities.

Settlement offers and discussions are typically excluded to promote settlement negotiations. If parties knew that their attempts to resolve disputes amicably could be used against them in court, they may be less willing to engage in open discussions, which could ultimately lead to more protracted litigation.

Plea bargaining also falls under this category, as evidence related to plea negotiations is generally inadmissible to protect the integrity of the plea bargaining process. This exclusion encourages defendants to negotiate cooperatively without the fear that such discussions will be held against them during trial.

Liability insurance evidence is excluded to prevent juries from being prejudiced against defendants based on their insurance status. The concern is that jurors may mistakenly believe that having insurance makes a party liable or that a defendant with substantial insurance will be seen as having deeper pockets, which could unfairly influence their decisions.

Each of these categories reflects the overarching goal of maintaining a fair trial process and encouraging disputes to be resolved outside of the courtroom. Thus, all of these types of evidence are generally excluded for public policy reasons.