Blog

A company makes a product whose direct labor standards are 0.9 hours per unit and $30 per hour. In December, the company produced 7,450 units using 6,205 direct labor-hours. The actual direct labor cost was $130,305.The labor efficiency variance for the month is:

Xander is accused of stealing a digital camera. Allegedly, Xander entered the accessories section of the store, peeled off the price tag of a $30 accessory, walked into the digital camera section of the store, selected a $500 digital camera, and covered the camera’s actual price tag with the $30 price tag. When the clerk scanned the item, he failed to notice the price tag switch, and Xander was able to leave the store after paying only $30. The clerk has identified Xander as the shopper who presented the wrongly tagged camera. Xander claims that he was not the one who committed this crime and that the store clerk misidentified him. The prosecutor wants to admit evidence that last year, Xander stole a $1500 cell phone by pasting a computer price tag from a $150 cell phone case onto the cell phone’s packaging, paying only $150 for the phone. Is this evidence admissible?

Rick filed a civil antitrust suit against Zippy’s after the restaurant raised the price of its loco moco. During his case-in-chief, Rick testified about the personal hardship, hunger, and psychic loss he suffered when the price of his favorite food increased fifty percent overnight. As part of its defense, Zippy’s called Rick’s neighbor, Melody. Melody testified that she has known Rick for more than twenty years and, in her opinion, Rick “has a very untruthful character.”  On cross-examination, Rick’s lawyer asked Melody: “Are you aware that when Rick received a $5,000 check from his auto insurance company, he returned the check because he knew the payment was an error?”  Plaintiff’s counsel objects.  Does defense counsel’s question elicit admissible evidence?

Same facts as #67. At trial, the plaintiff offers evidence of a number of mislabeled boxes and bottles containing steroids that were found in Dr. Seltzer’s office.  The mislabeled containers contained steroids wrongly identified as antihistamines and other non-steroidal medications. Defense counsel objects. The court should:

Under the FRE, which of the following is impermissible?  

Prosecution of D for murder. The prosecution calls PO, a police officer who collected physical evidence at the crime scene. PO authenticates her report and testifies that she is required to file such a report whenever she investigates. The prosecution offers the report as evidence. D objects. The court should:

Stephanie is suing Phillip for injuries she suffered when Phillip allegedly ran into her with a bicycle and then biked away.  Phillip claims he was not even riding his bike that day and that someone else must have struck Stephanie with a bicycle.  Stephanie calls Fran, an eyewitness, who will identify Phillip in court.  In response, Phillip wishes to call Dr. Niki to the stand.  Dr. Niki will testify that she is an experimental psychologist and has conducted dozens of tests and read about hundreds more regarding the unreliability of eyewitness identification.  Specifically, she will testify about the general unreliability of eyewitnesses, especially under stressful situations.  She will also testify that she watched Fran testify and that, based on her expertise, Fran seemed unsure of her identification of Phillip. What is the best objection that Stephanie can make to exclude Dr. Niki’s testimony?

Same facts as #48. Hyland proffers Bystander’s testimony that Bystander was talking to Witness when Bystander heard the crash and heard Witness, now deceased, exclaim, “That car doesn’t have any lights on!”  Bystander’s testimony is:

Cane physically assaulted Brayden outside of a bar. As Cane ran off, Brayden collapsed and lost consciousness. Before Brayden lost consciousness, one of the bar’s patrons heard Brayden shout: “I am sorry I cheated on my 2022 taxes, skimmed money off the top of my illegal drug sales, and caused Cane’s profits to tank, but? Do not let Cane get away with this!” Quick medical treatment saved Brayden, but he now suffers from amnesia and cannot recall any details of the assault. Can the bar patron testify about what Brayden shouted? 

A plaintiff in a civil case offers hearsay evidence against the defendant. The defendant fails to object to the evidence at the time, and the evidence is admitted. After the plaintiff wins the case, the defendant appeals. One of the defendant’s grounds for appeal is that the hearsay evidence was improperly admitted at trial. How should the appellate court proceed?