Also known as: impeaching evidence · impeachment evidences · impeachment · credibility evidence
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Evidence offered to undermine a witness's credibility rather than to prove a substantive fact in the case.
Imani Idowu, facing federal charges, seeks to introduce a prior inconsistent statement by the government's main witness. The statement is offered only to show the witness's lack of credibility and not as proof of any element of the offense. Because the statement functions solely as impeachment evidence, the prosecution need not produce it in initial disclosures under the governing rules.
Indigo Textiles sues Ideal Solutions for breach of contract. Ideal Solutions possesses an email that contradicts one of Indigo's key witnesses on a peripheral point. Ideal Solutions plans to use the email only to attack the witness's credibility at trial. The email therefore falls outside the initial disclosure obligation for documents that support claims or defenses.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ike Ingram sues Iris Energy after a workplace injury. After the accident Iris Energy installs a new safety guard on the equipment. Iris Energy offers evidence of the guard installation solely to impeach Ingram's testimony that the original design was obviously dangerous. The evidence is admissible for that limited impeachment purpose even though it would be excluded to prove negligence.
Isaac Irving, a party in civil litigation, seeks to introduce evidence of a witness's organizational membership to show bias. The evidence is offered only to attack the witness's credibility at trial. Because the evidence functions solely as impeachment evidence, it need not be produced in initial disclosures under the governing rules.
Ira Irving, a litigant, files a motion to introduce prior statements solely to impeach a defense witness's testimony. The statements contradict the witness on a peripheral credibility point. The court treats the statements as impeachment evidence exempt from ordinary disclosure obligations.
Insight Consulting sues its former client for unpaid fees. The client possesses internal memos that contradict its own witness on a credibility point. The client intends to use the memos only to impeach that witness. The memos therefore need not be produced in the client's initial disclosures of documents supporting its defenses.
No. Materials that a party intends to use solely for impeachment are exempt from the initial disclosure requirements for both witnesses and documents. The exemption applies because the rules require disclosure only of information that supports claims or defenses.
Supporting sources
Yes. Although evidence of subsequent remedial measures is generally inadmissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct, the court may admit it when offered for impeachment or to prove ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures.
Supporting sources
Impeachment evidence that could be used to attack the credibility of government witnesses falls within the prosecutor's constitutional duty to disclose favorable evidence under Brady and Giglio.
Supporting sources
Yes. Challenges to Senate procedures for conducting impeachment trials, including the handling of evidence, present nonjusticiable political questions because the Constitution commits the sole power to try all impeachments to the Senate.
Supporting sources
…is required to report to Congress on his or her activities and to inform Congress of any substantial grounds to believe that impeachment of a covered official may be warranted. In 1984, the House Judiciary Committee began an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) administration of the "Superfund"…