WV · rules
W. Va. R. Evid. 407
Subsequent Remedial Measures
When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:
(a) negligence;
(b) culpable conduct;
(c) a defect in a product or its design; or
(d) a need for a warning or instruction.
But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or — if disputed — proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures.
History
COMMENT ON RULE 407 Rule 407 was taken verbatim from the federal counterpart. In addition to stylistic changes, the rule makes two substantive changes. First, the words "injury or harm," found in the first sentence of the rule, were substituted for the word "event" in line 3 of the current state rule. Second, the rule has two new express grounds for exclusion: "a defect in a product or its design" and "a need for a warning or instruction."
Provenance
- Source
- courtswv.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
62c66e2128a8f7b734abad0e83fb6c377959269f24e65c3b9f82f28c8bb71e72
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.