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.

You could see it tangentially explained by the judge on day 10, where he says Oracle should be showing the licenses instead of draggging in executives to say, "It was our practice..." He goes on to say McNealy's testimony was essentially a waste of time. And he mentions 403. Evidence is supposed to be actual evidence, the best that is available, relevant to the claims being asserted.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

• I agreed with the judge, but I did not understand what he was saying! Thanks....nt - Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, April 29 2012 @ 05:37 AM EDT
• Waste of Time - Authored by: dio gratia on Sunday, April 29 2012 @ 06:30 AM EDT