Rule 408 Compromise and Offers To Compromise

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible. This rule does not require the exclusion of any evidence otherwise discoverable merely because it is presented in the course of compromise negotiations. This rule also does not require exclusion when the evidence is offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

Comment

Evidence of offers, conduct, and statements made in settlement negotiations is excluded because the offer or negotiations may be motivated by other than a concession of weakness of position. More importantly, public policy favors the compromise and settlement of disputes. Evidence of completed compromises or settlement, as opposed to offers, is likewise inadmissible. This rule again operates in the same way as Rule 404(b), thus if the evidence is offered for some relevant purpose and not merely to show an offer to compromise, it is admissible.[1] The trial court must do the weighing and balancing...