EVIDENCE LAW / In action for breach of contract against provider of jet aircraft to charter company trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing admission into evidence over aircraft owner’s objection on relevance grounds of FAA order assessing civil penalty against owner of jet aircraft.

The civil penalty order was relevant to breach of aircraft provider’s contract. Presumably – though the court’s opinion does not say – because such civil order indicated FAA evaluation of the aircraft supplied as not airworthy or otherwise not in condition required for the contract.

Jet Source Charter, Inc. v. Gemini Air Group Inc., Slip copy, 2013 WL 618906 (U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, February 20, 2013). Free copy available here.

“Gemini claims that the district court erred under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403 when the court admitted a Federal Aviation Administration Order assessing a civil penalty against Gemini. We review the district court’s admission of the Order for an abuse of discretion. Harper, 533 F.3d at 1030. The Order was directly relevant to whether Gemini had engaged in the conduct that Jet Source claims breached the contract. The district court was within its discretion in finding that the Order was not unduly prejudicial in light of its relevance. We affirm the district court’s admission of the Order.”