Article IV. Relevance
Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise
Advisory Commission Comments
The rule would work only slight changes in Tennessee evidence law. One difference is that statements of fact during settlement negotiations become inadmissible, but that is an improvement over the present practice admitting the fact statements.
Also salutary is the provision excluding compromises and settlement offers in “related litigation”. The drafted language would change the suggestion to the contrary in Tennessee Coach Co. v. Young, 18 Tenn. App. 592, 80 S.W.2d 107 (1934). Consistent with the proposal is T.C.A. § 29-11-105(b), excluding evidence of settlement by one tortfeasor where another goes to trial.
Tennessee courts exclude settlements and settlement offers only in civil trials, admitting them in criminal prosecutions. Carter v. State, 161 Tenn. 698, 34 S.W.2d 208 (1931). The proposed rule excludes such evidence in both civil and criminal trials.
Advisory Commission Comments [1993]
Where punitive damages are at issue, compromise offers become relevant and admissible despite Rule 408. See Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Company, 833 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. 1992).