- US v. Manske (7th Cir 1999)
- three views of breadth of 608(b) – scope of nonconviction misconduct questioning:
- broad view: allows questioning on almost any misconduct.
- narrow view: confines questions to acts that are themselves false or misleading.
- middle view: reaches conduct “seeking personal advantage by taking from others in violation of their rights.”
- cts applying FRE 608(b) have rejected broad view; generally allow questions that satisfy the narrow view by asking directly about deceptive statements or behavior.
- it’s cases like Manske, where conduct has a wrongful/exploitative aspect but isn’t false or deceptive in itself that courts come out either way.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
US v. Manske case brief
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...