Broad discovery rules exist to make verdicts rest on evidence rather than trial tactics.
Evidence
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permit such broad scope for discovery to prevent a party from hiding damaging evidence, or to prevent an attorney from springing a surprise on an unwary opponent at trial. In so doing, the rules seek to promote verdicts based on the weight of the evidence rather than on courtroom tactics. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2223
Categorization
- DEFINE: Explains the purpose behind the Federal Rules’ broad discovery scope, distinguishing evidence-seeking from trial by ambush.
- XREF: Ties directly to the course goal of connecting the foundational value of fairness to concrete procedural doctrine. — connects to: Discovery rules exist to prevent surprise tactics and evidence hiding.; Legal discovery rules exist to prevent trials from being contests of concealment — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2903; Effective closings convert scattered evidence into a coherent story that decides verdicts. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1397 (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- Discovery rules exist to prevent surprise tactics and evidence hiding.
#corroborates(0.95) - Legal discovery rules exist to prevent trials from being contests of concealment
#corroborates(0.95) — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2903 - Effective closings convert scattered evidence into a coherent story that decides verdicts.
#contradicts(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1397 - Discovery is reflexively overused by lawyers in litigation
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1083 - Evidence rules promote reliable fact-finding by admitting only trustworthy, relevant proof.
#complicates(0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1385