Short answer. Generally, no. Rule 130, Section 54 allows evidence of a party's moral character in a civil case only when that character is itself pertinent to an issue in the case — not simply to suggest the other party is the type of person who would act badly. If character isn't an element of your claim, it's inadmissible.
What the law says
In Civil Cases: Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
Rule 130, Section 54 — Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions. Read the full provision →
The general rule against character evidence
As a starting point, Rule 130 says evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible to prove that they acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion. In other words, you generally can't argue 'this person has a bad character, so they probably did the bad thing you're accusing them of' — courts want proof of what actually happened, not an inference drawn from someone's general reputation or personality.
The civil-case exception: character must be pertinent to the issue
Rule 130, Section 54 carves out a narrow exception for civil cases: evidence of a party's moral character is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case. This means character evidence is allowed only where the case itself turns on character — for example, a claim for damages arising from defamation, seduction, or another cause of action where the law makes a party's character or reputation a material element of the claim or defense, not a case where character is merely background color.
Why a typical damages case usually can't use this exception
In an ordinary civil action for damages arising from a car accident, a breach of contract, or general negligence, the other party's moral character is not an issue the law requires you to prove — the issue is what they did or failed to do, not who they generally are. Because character isn't pertinent to those kinds of claims, evidence of bad moral character offered simply to make the other party look worse to the court is not admissible under this rule, and a court can be expected to exclude it.
How character evidence can still come in through a witness
There's a separate route worth knowing about: character evidence about a witness — as opposed to a party — becomes admissible once that witness's own character has been impeached, and it can also be brought in through cross-examination into specific instances of conduct once character is genuinely at issue. That's a narrower and different situation from simply wanting to paint the opposing party as a bad person in a damages suit, and it doesn't change the general rule for parties in an ordinary civil case.