Rule 61.Harmless Error
Last verified July 1, 2026
Full Text of Rule 61
Plain-English Summary
Rule 61 is often called the harmless error rule. It instructs courts not to overturn a verdict, order, or judgment merely because something along the way was not done perfectly. A mistake in admitting or excluding evidence, or some other slip in how the case was handled, is not by itself a reason to grant a new trial or throw out a result.
Instead, the rule asks whether refusing to fix the error would be inconsistent with substantial justice, and it directs courts, at every stage of a case, to disregard errors that do not affect a party’s substantial rights. In practice, this means a party challenging a result has to show the mistake mattered, not merely that a mistake happened.
Frequently Asked Questions
If the judge made an evidentiary mistake at trial, does that automatically mean I get a new trial?
No. Rule 61 says an error in admitting or excluding evidence is not grounds for a new trial unless refusing to act would be inconsistent with substantial justice.
What is the standard for deciding whether an error matters?
The rule asks whether the error affected the substantial rights of the parties; if it did not, the court must disregard it.