Opinion ID: 737564
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Failure to Admit the Volvo Door into Evidence

Text: 21 We do not reverse a decision to exclude evidence in the absence of an abuse of discretion amounting to manifest error. Sage Realty Corp. v. Insurance Co. of North America, 34 F.3d 124, 128 (2d Cir.1994). Smith had not offered the Volvo door to be marked during the pre-trial marking conference, and tried to offer it into evidence without warning in the middle of the trial. Pretrial conferences exist to avoid such surprises; the district court's denial of the motion to enter the door into evidence was not an abuse of discretion. 22 We also agree with the district court that the door was not intended as demonstrative evidence. Smith's counsel stated at trial: [The Volvo door] existed at exactly the same time as did this Geo door and the comparison of the two doors shows to the jury clearly there was an alternative safer design. The district court properly found based on this statement that the door was more than simply a demonstrative exhibit.