Relevance is the evidence concept asking whether information has a meaningful connection to a fact that matters in the case.
In plain language, relevant evidence tends to make an important fact more or less likely. Relevance is usually the first gate, but relevant evidence can still be excluded for other reasons.
Why it matters
Relevance matters because trials are not open-ended conversations about everything connected to the parties. Courts use relevance to keep proof focused on disputed facts, claims, defenses, elements, damages, and credibility issues.
It also matters because objections often begin with whether the evidence has enough connection to the case.
Where it appears
Relevance appears in motions in limine, objections, evidence hearings, trial rulings, jury trials, bench trials, and summary-judgment records.
Practical example
In a negligence case about a wet floor, a photo showing the floor minutes before the fall may be relevant because it tends to show the condition of the floor at the time of injury.
How it differs from nearby terms
Relevance differs from admissible evidence. Relevant evidence may still be excluded if another rule applies. Admissible evidence is evidence the court allows to be used.
It also differs from materiality, which focuses on whether the fact matters under the governing law.
Related terms
Quick knowledge check
Question: What does relevance ask?
Answer: It asks whether evidence tends to make an important fact more or less likely.