MBE Rules · Evidence
Methods of proving character
FRE 405
The rule
Reputation and opinion always admissible when character evidence is allowed. Specific instances admissible only when character is an essential element of the claim or defense (e.g., defamation truth defense, negligent hiring). On cross-examination of a character witness, specific bad acts may be inquired about.
In plain English
You can use general statements about someone's character in court, but specific examples of their behavior are only allowed if their character is directly related to the case.
Worked example
In a defamation case, the defendant argues the plaintiff has a reputation for dishonesty. The court allows testimony about the plaintiff's reputation, but only specific lies if honesty is central to the case.
Memory hook
Character clues: reputation, opinion, specifics. General traits? Yes. Specific acts? Only essential or cross-exam.
The trap
Students think: specific acts always admissible. Wrong, because they’re limited to when character is essential or on cross. The actual test is essential element or cross-examination.
How examiners test it
MBE loves: character witness on stand, cross-exam asks about past acts. Trap: students forget specifics are limited to cross or essentials, not just any character evidence.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.