Alaska R. Evid. 407
When, after an event, measures are taken which, if taken previously, would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct in connection with the event. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent measures when offered for another purpose, such as impeachment or, if controverted, proving ownership, control, feasibility of precautionary measures, or defective condition in a products liability action.3/4
Alaska R. Evid. 407
Note: Chapter 62, SLA 2014 (HB 250), effective October 6, 2014, enacted various changes, including a new section AS 09.55.544 restricting the evidence that is admissible in medical malpractice actions. According to section 2 of the Act, AS 09.55.544(a)(2), enacted by section 1 of the Act, has the effect of amending Evidence Rule 407 by modifying the admissibility of evidence of subsequent remedial measures so that evidence of subsequent remedial measures in a malpractice cause of action is not admissible for any purpose.