Rule 411. Liability Insurance
Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when offered for another purpose, such as proof of agency, ownership, or control, or bias or prejudice of a witness.
Note:
This rule is identical to the federal rule and is consistent with the law in South Carolina. Dunn v. Charleston Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 311 S.C. 43, 426 S.E.2d 756 (1993) (the fact that a defendant is protected from liability by insurance shall not be made known to the jury); Sarvis v. Register, 288 S.C. 236, 341 S.E.2d 791 (1986) (generally, the existence of insurance should not be brought to the attention of the jury).
Annotations Rule 411
Generally
Rule 411, SCRE (prohibiting the admission of evidence tending to show a person was insured against liability); Crocker v. Weathers, 240 S.C. 412, 424, 126 S.E.2d 335, 340-41 (1962) ("The long-established rule of our decisions is that the fact that a defendant is protected from liability in an action for damages by insurance shall not be made known to the jury. The reason of the rule is to avoid prejudice in the verdict, which might result from the jury's knowledge that the defendant will not have to pay it."). Ex parte Builders Mut. Ins. Co., 431 S.C. 93, 98, 847 S.E.2d 87, 90 n.1 (2020).
In Yoho, we adopted a framework for analysis in considering whether or...
