Rule 2:105. Proof Admitted for Limited Purposes

• Library: A Guide to the Rules of Evidence in Virginia (Virginia CLE) (2021 Ed.)

Rule 2:105. PROOF ADMITTED FOR LIMITED PURPOSES

When evidence is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not admissible as to another party or for another purpose, the court upon motion shall restrict such evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly. The court may give such limiting instructions sua sponte, to which any party may object.

NOTES

Evidence that is admissible for one purpose may be received for that purpose even though it may not be received for another purpose. Spotsylvania County Sch. Bd. v. Seaboard Sur. Co., 243 Va. 202, 210 (1992); Stockton v. Commonwealth, 241 Va. 192, 205, cert. denied, 502 U.S. 902 (1991); Rosenberg v. Mason, 157 Va. 215 (1931) See Barkley v. Wallace, 267 Va. 369, 373 (2004) (medical bills relevant to establish inconvenience to the plaintiff). Where the evidence is limited, either because it is admissible against some but not all parties or for some but not all purposes, the court can so instruct the jury. Meyer's Sons v. Falk, 99 Va. 385, 388 (1901).

The rule in Virginia is that a party must ask for a limiting instruction if one is desired. Hall v. Commonwealth, 233 Va. 369, 374 (1987); see Cheng v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. 26 (1990); Clanton v. Commonwealth, 223 Va. 41, 54 (1982). Failure to make a request generally bars a party from complaining on appeal about the absence of an instruction. See, e.g., Commercial Distribs., Inc. v. Blankenship, 240 Va. 382 (1990); Manetta v. Commonwealth, 231 Va. 123, 127 n.2 (1986); Carter v. Pickering, 191 Va. 801, 811 (1951). The trial judge may also give a limiting...