Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.
Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
Evidence of the habit of a person or of the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.
IRE 406 is identical to the federal rule before the latter's amendment solely for stylistic purposes effective December 1, 2011. For a pre-codification case allowing evidence of the routine practice of an organization even in the absence of corroboration, see Grewe v. West Washington County Unit District No. 10, 303 Ill. App. 3d 299, 307 (1999).
Illinois cases had been inconsistent on whether the availability of eyewitness testimony prohibited habit testimony, with a trend in recent cases towards the admissibility of such evidence regardless of the presence of eyewitness testimony. IRE 406 removes any doubt...
