In federal civil actions based on diversity of citizenship and involving situations such as automobile collisions and, more generally, wrongful death cases, state dead man statutes, when they exist, often apply. This module will not explore state dead man's stautes at this time. However, note that interstate choice of law problems may apply: If some state's dead man's statute may apply, _which_ state's law of evidence applies and determines the existence and scope of an applicable dead man's statute?

Fed. R. Evid. 405(a) advisory committee's note ("The express allowance of inquiry into specific instances of conduct on cross-examination in subdivision (a) and the express allowance of it as part of a case in chief when character is actually in issue in subdivision (b) contemplate that testimony of specific instances is not generally...When an exception to the character evidence prohibition makes evidence of a criminal defedant's character admissible, the testimony of a witness on direct examination about the defendant's character must take the form of reputation or opinion and it cannot consist of specific instances of the defendant's conduct.

Fed. R. Evid. 103(a) ("Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence (a) Effect of erroneous ruling. Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and (1) Objection. - In case the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of record,...If an opponent of evidence wishes to preserve a claim, for later review, that a trial court erred in admitting evidence, the opponent ordinarily must object to the offered evidence before the trial court rules that the evidence is admissible. If an opponent fails to make such an objection, the opponent will ordinarily be said to have waived or forfeited its claim that the trial court erred in admitting the evidence.

United States v. Robinson, 161 F.3d 463, 467-468 (7th Cir. 1998) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of the April 18 armed bank robbery where such evidence demonstrated the similarities between the manner in which the armed bank robberies were carried out, thus proving identity by...If another crime or wrong is offered under the second sentence of Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show the identity of an actor, wrongdoer, or defendant (e.g., to show that a criminal defendant rather than someone else committed the crime for which defendant is on trial), the other crime or wrong and the act, wrong, or crime at issue at trial must have been committed in a distinctive as well as similar fashion.