reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
MT Code § Rule 603 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 603. Oath or affirmation

  Rule 603. Oath or affirmation.   Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness' conscience and impress the witness' mind with the duty to do so.   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 604 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 604. Interpreters

  Rule 604. Interpreters.   An interpreter is subject to the provisions of these rules relating to qualification as an expert and the administration of an oath or affirmation to make a true translation.   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 605 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 605. Competency of judge as witness

  Rule 605. Competency of judge as witness.   The judge presiding at the trial may not testify in that trial as a witness. No objection need be made in order to preserve the point.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 606 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 606. Competency of juror as witness

  Rule 606. Competency of juror as witness.   (a) At the trial. A member of the jury may not be called or testify as a witness before that jury in the trial of the case in which the juror is sitting. If the juror is called to testify, the opposing party shall be afforded an opportunity to object out of the presence of the jury.   (b) Inquiry into validity of verdict or indictment. Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations or to the effect of anything upon that or any other juror's mind or emotions as influencing the juror to assent or dissent from the verdict or indictment or concerning the juror's mental processes in connection therewith. Nor may a juror's affidavit or evidence of any statement by the juror concerning a matter about which the juror would be precluded from testifying be received for these purposes.   However, as an exception to this subdivision, a juror may testify and an affidavit or evidence of any kind be received as to any matter or statement concerning only the following questions, whether occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations or not: (1) whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention; or (2) whether any outside influence was brought to bear upon any juror; or (3) whether any juror has been induced to assent to any general or special verdict, or finding on any question submitted to them by the court, by a resort to the determination of chance.   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 607 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 607. Who may impeach; party not bound by testimony

  Rule 607. Who may impeach; party not bound by testimony.   (a) The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness.   (b) No party is bound by the testimony of any 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 608 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 608. Evidence of character and conduct of witness

  Rule 608. Evidence of character and conduct of witness.   (a) Opinion and reputation evidence of character. The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of opinion or reputation, but subject to these limitations: (1) the evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, and (2) evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence or otherwise.   (b) Specific instances of conduct. Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' credibility, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning the witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.   The giving of testimony, whether by an accused or by any other witness, does not operate as a waiver of the witness' privilege against self-incrimination when examined with respect to matters which relate only to 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 609 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 609. Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime

  Rule 609. Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime.   For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime is not admissible.   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 610 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 610. Religious beliefs or opinions

  Rule 610. Religious beliefs or opinions.   Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced.   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 611 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 611. Mode and order of interrogation and presentation; re-examination and recall; confrontation

  Rule 611. Mode and order of interrogation and presentation; re-examination and recall; confrontation.   (a) Control by court. The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, (2) avoid needless consumption of time, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.   (b) Scope of cross-examination.   (1) Cross-examination should be limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The court may, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.   (2) Evidence developed on cross-examination may be considered by the trier of fact as proof of any fact in issue in the case.   (c) Leading questions. Leading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop the witness' testimony. Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions.   (d) Re-examination and recall. A witness may be re-examined as to the same matters to which the witness testified only in the discretion of the court, but without exception the witness may be re-examined as to any new matter brought out during cross-examination. After the examination of the witness has been concluded by all the parties to the action, that witness may be recalled only in the discretion of the court. This rule shall not limit the right of any party to recall a witness in rebuttal.   (e) Confrontation. Except as otherwise provided by constitution, statute, these rules, or other rules applicable to the courts of this state, at the trial of an action, a witness can be heard only in the presence and subject to the examination of all the parties to the action, if they choose to attend and examine.   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 612 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 612. Writings used to refresh memory

  Rule 612. Writings used to refresh memory.   If a witness uses a writing to refresh memory for the purpose of testifying, either   (1) while testifying, or   (2) before testifying, if the court in its discretion determines it is necessary in the interests of justice, an adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to introduce into evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness. If it is claimed that the writing contains matters not related to the subject matter of the testimony the court shall examine the writing in camera, excise any portions not so related, and order delivery of the remainder to the party entitled thereto. Any portion withheld over objection shall be preserved and made available to the appellate court in the event of an appeal. If a writing is not produced or delivered pursuant to order under this rule, the court shall make any order justice requires, except that in criminal cases when the prosecution elects not to comply, the order shall be one striking the testimony or, if the court in its discretion determines that the interests of justice so require, declaring a mistrial.   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 613 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 613. Prior statements of witnesses

  Rule 613. Prior statements of witnesses.   (a) Examining witness concerning prior statement. In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the same shall be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel.   (b) Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statement of witness. Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate the witness thereon, or the interests of justice otherwise require. This provision does not apply to admissions of a party-opponent as defined in Rule 801(d)(2).   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 614 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 614. Calling and interrogation of witnesses by court

  Rule 614. Calling and interrogation of witnesses by court.   (a) Calling by court. The court may, on its own motion or at the suggestion of a party, call witnesses and all parties are entitled to cross-examine witnesses thus called.   (b) Interrogation by court. The court may interrogate witnesses, whether called by itself or a party; provided, however, that in trials before a jury, the court's questioning must be cautiously guarded so as not to constitute express or implied comment.   (c) Objections. Objections to the calling of a witness by the court or to the interrogation by it may be made at the time or at the next available opportunity when the jury is not present.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 615 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VI. Witnesses|Rule 615. Exclusion of witnesses

  Rule 615. Exclusion of witnesses.   At the request of a party, the court shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses, and it may make the order of its own motion. This rule does not authorize exclusion of (1) a party who is a natural person, or (2) an officer or employee of a party which is not a natural person designated as its representative by its attorney, or (3) a person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of the party's cause.   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 701 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony|Rule 701. Opinion testimony by lay witnesses

  Rule 701. Opinion testimony by lay witnesses.   If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness' testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.   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 702 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony|Rule 702. Testimony by experts

  Rule 702. Testimony by experts.   If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 703 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony|Rule 703. Basis of opinion testimony by experts

  Rule 703. Basis of opinion testimony by experts.   The facts or data in a particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in a particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence.   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 704 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony|Rule 704. Opinions on ultimate issue

  Rule 704. Opinions on ultimate issue.   Testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 705 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony|Rule 705. Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion

  Rule 705. Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion.   The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the court requires otherwise. The expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination.   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 801 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VIII. Hearsay|Rule 801. Definitions

  Rule 801. Definitions.   The following definitions apply under this article:   (a) Statement. A statement is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion.   (b) Declarant. A declarant is a person who makes a statement.   (c) Hearsay. Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.   (d) Statements which are not hearsay. A statement is not hearsay if:   (1) Prior statement by witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (A) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, or (B) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of subsequent fabrication, improper influence or motive, or (C) one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or   (2) Admission by party-opponent. The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement, in either an individual or a representative capacity, or (B) a statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth, or (C) a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or (D) a statement by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of that relationship, or (E) a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.   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 802 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VIII. Hearsay|Rule 802. Hearsay rule

  Rule 802. Hearsay rule.   Hearsay is not admissible except as otherwise provided by statute, these rules, or other rules applicable in the courts of this state.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 805 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VIII. Hearsay|Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay

  Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay.   Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of a combined statement conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 806 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article VIII. Hearsay|Rule 806. Attacking and supporting the credibility of declarant

  Rule 806. Attacking and supporting the credibility of declarant.   When a hearsay statement, or a statement defined by Rule 801(d)(2)(C), (D), or (E) has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked and, if attacked, may be supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement or conduct by the declarant at any time, inconsistent with the declarant's hearsay statement, is not subject to any requirement that the declarant may have been afforded an opportunity to deny or explain. If the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party is entitled to examine the declarant on the statement as if under cross-examination.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 7, 1990, eff. June 7, 1990; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 26, 1990, eff. June 26, 1990; amd. Sup. Ct. Ord. June 20, 2007, eff. Oct. 1, 2007.
MT Code § Rule 901 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IX. Authentication and Identification|Rule 901. Requirement of authentication or identification

  Rule 901. Requirement of authentication or identification.   (a) General provision. The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.   (b) Illustrations. By way of illustration only, and not by way of limitation, the following are examples of authentication or identification conforming with the requirements of this rule:   (1) Testimony of witness with knowledge. Testimony that a matter is what it is claimed to be.   (2) Nonexpert opinion on handwriting. Nonexpert opinion as to the genuineness of handwriting, based upon familiarity not acquired for purposes of the litigation.   (3) Comparison by trier or expert witness. Comparison by the trier of fact or by expert witnesses with specimens which have been authenticated.   (4) Distinctive characteristics and the like. Appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns or other distinctive characteristics, taken in conjunction with circumstances.   (5) Voice identification. Identification of a voice, whether heard firsthand or through mechanical or electronic transmission or recording, by opinion based upon hearing the voice at any time under circumstances connecting it with the alleged speaker.   (6) Telephone conversations. Telephone conversations, by evidence that a call was made to the number assigned at the time by the telephone company to a particular person or business, if (A) in the case of a person, circumstances, including self-identification, show the person answering to be the one called, or (B) in the case of a business, the call was made to a place of business and the conversation related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone.   (7) Public records or reports. Evidence that a writing authorized by law to be recorded or filed and in fact recorded or filed in a public office, or a purported public record, report, statement, or data compilation, in any form, is from the public office where items of this nature are kept.   (8) Ancient documents or data compilation. Evidence that a document or data compilation, in any form, (A) is in such condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity, (B) was in a place where it, if authentic, would likely be, and (C) has been in existence 20 years or more at the time it is offered.   (9) Process or system. Evidence describing a process or system used to produce a result and showing that the process or system produces an accurate result.   (10) Method provided by statute or rule. Any method of authentication or identification provided by statute, these rules, or other rules applicable in the courts of this state.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.
MT Code § Rule 903 (2021)
2021 Montana Code Annotated|Title 26. Evidence|Chapter 10. Montana Rules of Evidence|Part Article IX. Authentication and Identification|Rule 903. Subscribing witness' testimony unnecessary

  Rule 903. Subscribing witness' testimony unnecessary.   The testimony of a subscribing witness is not necessary to authenticate a writing unless required by the laws of the jurisdiction whose laws govern the validity of the writing.   History: Ad. Sup. Ct. Ord. 12729, Dec. 29, 1976, eff. July 1, 1977.