reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
MT Code § Rule 103 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article I. General Provisions|Rule 103. Rulings on evidence

  Rule 103. Rulings on evidence.   (a) Effect of erroneous ruling. Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and   (1) Objection. In case the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of record, stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not apparent from the context; or   (2) Offer of proof. In case the ruling is one excluding evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the court by offer or was apparent from the context within which questions were asked.   (b) Record of offer and ruling. The court may add any other or further statement which shows the character of the evidence, the form in which it was offered, the objection made, and the ruling thereon. It may direct the making of an offer in question and answer form.   (c) Hearing of the jury. In jury cases, proceedings shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to prevent inadmissible evidence from being suggested to the jury by any means, such as making statements or offers of proof or asking questions in the hearing of the jury.   (d) Plain error. Nothing in this rule precludes taking notice of plain errors affecting substantial rights although they were not brought to the attention of the court.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 104 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article I. General Provisions|Rule 104. Preliminary questions of admissibility

  Rule 104. Preliminary questions of admissibility.   (a) Questions of admissibility generally. Preliminary questions concerning the qualification of a person to be a witness, the existence of a privilege, or the admissibility of evidence shall be determined by the court. In making its determination it is not bound by the rules of evidence except those with respect to privileges.   (b) Admissibility subject to a condition. Except as otherwise provided by law, when the admissibility of evidence depends upon proof of other connecting facts, the court may admit such evidence subject to the condition that further evidence be introduced sufficient to support a finding of those connecting facts. The order of proof may be regulated by the sound discretion of the court.   (c) Hearing of jury. Hearings on the admissibility of confessions shall in all cases be conducted out of the hearing of the jury. Hearings on other preliminary matters shall be so conducted when the interests of justice require or, when an accused is a witness and so requests.   (d) Testimony by accused. The accused does not, by testifying upon a preliminary matter, become subject to cross-examination as to other issues in the case.   (e) Weight and credibility. This rule does not limit the right of a party to introduce before the jury evidence relevant to weight or credibility.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 105 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article I. General Provisions|Rule 105. Limited admissibility

  Rule 105. Limited admissibility.   When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not admissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the court, upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 106 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article I. General Provisions|Rule 106. Remainder of or related acts, writings, or statements

  Rule 106. Remainder of or related acts, writings, or statements.   (a) When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or recorded statement or series thereof is introduced by a party:   (1) an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part of such item or series thereof which ought in fairness to be considered at that time; or   (2) an adverse party may inquire into or introduce any other part of such item of evidence or series thereof.   (b) This rule does not limit the right of any party to cross-examine or further develop as part of the case matters covered by this rule.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 201 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article II. Judicial Notice|Rule 201. Judicial notice of facts

  Rule 201. Judicial notice of facts.   (a) Scope of rule. This rule governs judicial notice of all facts.   (b) Kinds of facts. A fact to be judicially noticed must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably questioned.   (c) When discretionary. A court may take judicial notice, whether requested or not.   (d) When mandatory. A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.   (e) Opportunity to be heard. A party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter noticed. In the absence of prior notification, the request may be made after judicial notice has been taken.   (f) Time of taking notice. Judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding.   (g) Instructing the jury. In a civil action or proceeding, the court shall instruct the jury to accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed. In a criminal case, the court shall instruct the jury that it may, but is not required to, accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 301 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article III. Presumptions|Rule 301. Presumptions in general

  Rule 301. Presumptions in general.   (a) Presumption defined. A presumption is an assumption of fact that the law requires to be made from another fact or group of facts found or otherwise established in the action or proceeding.   (b) Classification and effect of presumptions.   (1) Conclusive presumptions are presumptions that are specifically declared conclusive by statute. Conclusive presumptions may not be controverted.   (2) All presumptions, other than conclusive presumptions, are disputable presumptions and may be controverted. A disputable presumption may be overcome by a preponderance of evidence contrary to the presumption. Unless the presumption is overcome, the trier of fact must find the assumed fact in accordance with the presumption.   (c) Inconsistent presumptions. If presumptions are inconsistent the court shall apply the presumption that is founded upon weightier considerations of public policy. If considerations of public policy are of equal weight the court shall disregard both presumptions.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 302 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article III. Presumptions|Rule 302. Applicability of federal law in civil cases

  Rule 302. Applicability of federal law in civil cases.   In civil actions and proceedings, the effect of a presumption respecting a fact which is an element of a claim or defense as to which federal law supplies the rule of decision is determined in accordance with federal law.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 401 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 401. Definition of relevant evidence

  Rule 401. Definition of relevant evidence.   Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Relevant evidence may include evidence bearing upon the credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 402 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 402. Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible

  Rule 402. Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible.   All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by constitution, statute, these rules, or other rules applicable in the courts of this state. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 403 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 403. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time

  Rule 403. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.   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, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 404 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 404. Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct, exceptions; other crimes; character in issue

  Rule 404. Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct, exceptions; other crimes; character in issue.   (a) Character evidence generally. Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:   (1) Character of accused. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same.   (2) Character of victim. Evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case or in an assault case where the victim is incapable of testifying to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.   (3) Character of witness. Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in Article VI.   (b) Other crimes, wrongs, acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.   (c) Character in issue. Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is admissible in cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 405 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 405. Methods of proving character

  Rule 405. Methods of proving character.   (a) Reputation or opinion. In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct.   (b) Specific instances of conduct. In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, or where the character of the victim relates to the reasonableness of force used by the accused in self defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 406 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 406. Habit; routine practice

  Rule 406. Habit; routine practice.   (a) Habit and routine practice defined. A habit is a person's regular response to a repeated specific situation. A routine practice is a regular course of conduct of a group of persons or an organization.   (b) Admissibility. Evidence of habit or of routine practice, whether corroborated or not, and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that conduct on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.   (c) Method of proof. Habit or routine practice may be proved by testimony in the form of an opinion or by specific instances of conduct sufficient in number to warrant a finding that the habit existed or that the practice was routine.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 407 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 407. Subsequent remedial measures

  Rule 407. Subsequent remedial measures.   When, after an injury or harm allegedly caused by an event, measures are taken that, if taken previously, would have made the injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product, a defect in a product's design, or a need for a warning instruction. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent measures when offered for another purpose, such as proving ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or impeachment.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 20, 2007, eff. Oct. 1, 2007.
MT Code § Rule 408 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 408. Compromise and offers to compromise

  Rule 408. Compromise and offers to compromise.   Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible. This rule does not require exclusion of any evidence otherwise discoverable merely because it is presented in the course of compromise negotiations. This rule also does not require exclusion when the evidence is offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 409 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 409. Payment of expenses

  Rule 409. Payment of expenses.   Evidence of payment of expenses occasioned by an injury or occurrence is not admissible to prove liability.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 410 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 410. Offer to plead guilty; nolo contendere; withdrawn plea of guilty

  Rule 410. Offer to plead guilty; nolo contendere; withdrawn plea of guilty.   Evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn, or a plea of nolo contendere, or of an offer to plead guilty or nolo contendere to the crime charged or any other crime, or of statements made in connection with any of the foregoing pleas or offers, is not admissible in any civil or criminal action, case, or proceeding against the person who made the plea or offer. This rule shall not apply to the introduction of voluntary and reliable statements made in court on the record in connection with any of the foregoing pleas or offers where offered for impeachment purposes or in a subsequent prosecution of the declarant for perjury or false statement.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 411 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IV. Relevancy and Its Limits|Rule 411. Liability insurance

  Rule 411. Liability insurance.   Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue of whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when offered for another purpose, such as proof of agency, ownership, or control, or bias or prejudice of a witness.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 501 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article V. Privileges|Rule 501. Privileges recognized only as provided

  Rule 501. Privileges recognized only as provided.   Except as otherwise provided by constitution, statute, these rules, or other rules applicable in the courts of this state, no person has a privilege to:   (1) refuse to be a witness;   (2) refuse to disclose any matter;   (3) refuse to produce any object or writing; or   (4) prevent another from being a witness or disclosing any matter or producing any object or writing.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 502 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article V. Privileges|Rule 502. Identity of informer

  Rule 502. Identity of informer.   (a) Rule of privilege. The United States or a state or subdivision thereof has a privilege to refuse to disclose the identity of a person who has furnished information relating to or assisting in an investigation of a possible violation of a law.   (b) Who may claim the privilege. The privilege may be claimed by an appropriate representative of the public entity to which the information was furnished.   (c) Exceptions and limitations.   (1) Voluntary disclosure; informer a witness. No privilege exists under this rule if the identity of the informer or the informer's interest in the subject matter of the informer's communication has been disclosed to those who would have cause to resent the communication by a holder of the privilege or by the informer's own action, or if the informer appears as a witness for the public entity.   (2) Testimony on relevant issue. If it appears in the case that an informer may be able to give testimony relevant to any issue in a criminal case or to a fair determination of a material issue on the merits in a civil case to which a public entity is a party, and the public entity invokes the privilege, the court shall give the public entity an opportunity to show facts relevant to determining whether the informer can, in fact, supply that testimony.   If the Court finds that the informer should be required to give the testimony, and the public entity elects not to disclose the informer's identity, the court on motion of the defendant in a criminal case shall dismiss the charges to which the testimony would relate, and the court may do so on its own motion. In civil cases, the court may make any order that justice requires.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 503 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article V. Privileges|Rule 503. Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure

  Rule 503. Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure.   (a) General rule. A person upon whom these rules confer a privilege against disclosure waives the privilege if the person or the person's predecessor while the holder of the privilege voluntarily discloses or consents to disclosure of any significant part of the privileged matter. This rule does not apply if the disclosure itself is privileged.   (b) Joint holders. Where two or more persons are joint holders of a privilege, a waiver of the right of a particular joint holder to claim the privilege does not affect the right of another joint holder to claim the privilege.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 504 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article V. Privileges|Rule 504. Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim the privilege

  Rule 504. Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim the privilege.   A claim of privilege is not defeated by a disclosure which was (a) compelled erroneously or (b) made without opportunity to claim the privilege.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 505 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article V. Privileges|Rule 505. Comment upon or inference from claim of privilege

  Rule 505. Comment upon or inference from claim of privilege.   The claim of a privilege, whether in the present proceeding or upon a prior occasion, is not a proper subject of comment by the court or counsel. No inference may be drawn therefrom.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 601 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 601. Competency in general; disqualification

  Rule 601. Competency in general; disqualification.   (a) General rule competency. Every person is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules.   (b) Disqualification of witnesses. A person is disqualified to be a witness if the court finds that (1) the witness is incapable of expression concerning the matter so as to be understood by the judge and jury either directly or through interpretation by one who can understand the witness or (2) the witness is incapable of understanding the duty of a witness to tell the truth.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.
MT Code § Rule 602 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 602. Lack of personal knowledge

  Rule 602. Lack of personal knowledge.   A witness may not testify as to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness' own testimony. This rule is subject to the provisions of Rule 703, relating to opinion testimony by expert witnesses.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990.