Concession Ends Relevance
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- Evidence1
Example wrong choices
19400_christian-veterinarian-spay · EVIDENCE · Choice ANo, because once the court is satisfied that a witness is qualified as an expert on diseases and injuries of the relevant type, further qualification evidence is unnecessary.
Why it's attractive
Overclaim: 'unnecessary' proves too much. Court's gatekeeping ≠ jury's credibility task.
Why it's wrong
Overclaim: 'unnecessary' proves too much. Court's gatekeeping ≠ jury's credibility task.
19400_christian-veterinarian-spay · EVIDENCE · Choice BNo, because the opposing party's concession that the witness is an expert removes the issue from the case.
Why it's attractive
Overclaim: concession resolves the formal dispute, not the jury's need to hear qualifications.
Why it's wrong
Overclaim: concession resolves the formal dispute, not the jury's need to hear qualifications.
19400_christian-veterinarian-spay · EVIDENCE · Choice DYes, because the court must independently verify a witness's expertise and cannot allow the matter to be resolved by stipulation of the parties.
Why it's attractive
Misfit: misstates the court's relationship to stipulations. Court *may* accept stipulation.
Why it's wrong
Misfit: misstates the court's relationship to stipulations. Court *may* accept stipulation.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →