Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Conditional Probative Value And The Reconstruction Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Dale A. Nance
Conditional Probative Value And The Reconstruction Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Dale A. Nance
Michigan Law Review
In a recent article, Richard Friedman articulates a modified and generalized version of the doctrine of conditional relevance, which he calls "conditional probative value." This version comes in response to a substantial body of academic criticism of the traditional doctrine. As one of the critics to whom Professor Friedman responds, I offer this reply with two purposes in mind: (1) to clarify the relationship between Friedman's analysis and my earlier reinterpretation of the conditional relevance doctrine; and (2) to address Friedman's specific proposals with regard to the Federal Rules of Evidence. I conclude that Friedman's articulation helps clarify the logic …
Refining Conditional Probative Value, Richard D. Friedman
Refining Conditional Probative Value, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The subject of conditional relevance, or what I think is better called "conditional probative value," must seem hopelessly ard to many. It continues to engage the attention of evidence scholars, however, because it forms part of the conceptual underpinnings of many parts of evidentiary law. Dale'Nance, one of the most astute evidence scholars of our time, has previously written at length on the subject' and has done so now more briefly in response to an article of mine. I offer an even briefer continuation of the discussion.
Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism Without Myth, Richard D. Friedman
Conditional Probative Value: Neoclassicism Without Myth, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The concept of conditional relevance is an essential aspect of the classical model of evidentiary law. Some of the great scholars of evidence have endorsed and shaped it.1 Under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b) it plays a crucial role in the division of responsibility between judge and jury,2 as well as in the application of the personal knowledge3 and authentication 4 requirements. And the Supreme Court has applied it with great force.5 In recent years, though, the concept has come under attack from several notable scholars. The late Vaughn Ball led the assault, calling the concept a "myth."'6 Peter Tillers, …
Response: Exaggerated And Misleading Reports Of The Death Of Conditional Relevance, Peter Tillers
Response: Exaggerated And Misleading Reports Of The Death Of Conditional Relevance, Peter Tillers
Michigan Law Review
In 1980 the late Professor Vaughn C. Ball of the University of Georgia published an article called The Myth of Conditional Relevancy. Ball's article is widely admired. One well-known evidence scholar, Ronald J. Allen, liked Ball's article so much that he borrowed its title word for word. Although the extent of Allen's enthusiasm for Ball's analysis may be unmatched, a good number of students of evidence - including this writer - have said that Ball's analysis of conditional relevance is both original and important. Richard Friedman, by contrast, cannot be counted as one of Ball's more ardent admirers. Although Friedman …