Philadelphia Personal Injury Attorney Talks About Philadelphia Personal Injury ImpeachmentOne litigant typically seeks to impeach the credibility of the opposing litigation or his witnesses. Often this impeachment is attempted with regard to matters that are not germane to the case. Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 403 states: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is 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. Witnesses can be contradicted only on matters germane to issues being tried in the case. The General Equipment Manufactures vs. Westfield Insurance Company, 635 A.2d 173 (Pa. Super. 1993). The test of materiality of a fact brought out on cross examination is whether the party cross examining would be entitled to prove the fact that part of his own case. Id. Witnesses may not contradicted upon collateral matters. Commonwealth v. Johnson, 638 A.2d 940 (Pa. 1994). A collateral matter is one, which has no relationship to the matter on trial. Id. Credibility of witnesses may not be impeached on collateral matters and the grounds for contradicting a witness must be germane to issues at trial. Walley v. Iraca, 520 A 2d. 886 (Pa. Super. 1987). No witness can be contradicted on everything he testified to in order to test credibility. McGoldrick v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 241 A.2d 90(Pa. 1968). The witness my not be contradicted on collateral matters. Id. Pivitol trial issues cannot be sidetracked for determination of whether a witness lied in making a statement about something which has no relationship to the case on trial. Id. Contradicting evidence is collateral for purposes of the rule that a witness may not be contradicted on collateral matters, if it may not be admitted at trial for any purpose independent of the contradiction. Id. If the contradiction concerns a matter which is collateral because it is unreasonably prejudicial to one of the parties, a trial court abuses its discretion by admitting that contradiction. Id. |
