For purposes of the hearsay exceptions created by Federal Rule of Evidence 804 or a comparable State rule a declarant is "unavailable" within the meaning of Rule 804(a) or a comparable State rule if the declarant is exempted by ruling of the court on the ground of privilege from testifying concerning the subject matter of the declarant's statement.

Brazos River Authority v. GE Ionics, Inc., 469 F.3d 416, 426 (5th Cir. 2006) (holding, in plaintiff's civil action for breach of contract, breach of implied warranties, and fraud, that evidence of similar fires at other facilities was properly excluded because "the propensities of a particular person to...When offered in civil actions, other similar events generally do not constitute character, or propensity, and are therefore not barred by the character rule, which prohibits the use of a person's character or propensity to show that person's conduct.

Bearint ex rel. Bearint v. Dorell Juvenile Group, Inc., 389 F.3d 1339, 1349 (11th Cir. 2004) (holding, in plaintiff parents' personal injury action against defendant infant seat manufacturer for negligence, that "[defendant] had not opened the door....If a trial court admits inadmissible evidence but later in the trial recognizes its error, the trial court has the discretion to allow an opponent to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence to "cure" or ameliorate the harm done by the opponent's use of inadmissible evidence but the trial can or should allow the admission of curative evidence only if it concludes that the admission of curative evidence will not cause undue prejudice, delay, or confusion and will not do more harm than good to the goal of accurate fact finding.

United States v. Reynoso-Uloa, 548 F.2d 1329, 1341 (9th Cir. 1977) (upholding trial court's admission of agent's testimony about accused's previous heroin transactions because such evidence was offered to prove accused's predisposition after he relied on entrapment as a defense).A subjective entrapment defense makes an accused's criminal liability contingent on a finding of the accused's predisposition or the accused's lack of predisposition to commit the crime charged and since criminal predisposition is a character trait, the defense of subjective entrapment makes accused's character an element of either a defense or a criminal charge, evidence of accused's criminal predisposition -- including evidence in the form of reputation, opinion, and evidence of specific instances of accused's conduct -- is not barred by the rule against the use of a person's character to show the person's conduct.