Rule 408: Compromise Offers and Negotiations

Evidence of furnishing, promising, or offering (or accepting, promising to accept, or offering to accept) a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim that was disputed as to either validity or amount is not admissible to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction. The rule also covers conduct or statements made during compromise negotiations. The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness's bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

• 1Settlement offers and statements during negotiations are inadmissible to prove liability or damages
• 2The policy is to encourage candid settlement discussions and efficient dispute resolution
• 3There must be a disputed claim — the rule does not protect pre-dispute communications
• 4Cannot be used for impeachment by prior inconsistent statement (unlike some other policy exclusion rules)
• 5Permitted purposes include proving bias, negating undue delay, or proving obstruction of criminal investigation

• Distinguishing between statements made during settlement negotiations (protected) and independent admissions of fact (not protected if made outside negotiations)
• Whether a 'claim' was disputed at the time of the communication
• The interplay between civil settlement discussions and subsequent criminal proceedings
• Identifying permitted alternative purposes for settlement evidence (bias, undue delay)