Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
I'Ll Take It For What It Is Worth -- The Use Of Hearsay Evidence By Labor Arbitrators: A Primer And Modest Proposal, Marvin F. Hill, Jr., Tammy M. Westhoff,
I'Ll Take It For What It Is Worth -- The Use Of Hearsay Evidence By Labor Arbitrators: A Primer And Modest Proposal, Marvin F. Hill, Jr., Tammy M. Westhoff,
Journal of Dispute Resolution
This article considers these and other selected problems dealing with hearsay evidence that are likely to be encountered in the arbitral forum. It is our thesis that arbitrators do and should credit some (but not all) forms of hearsay evidence, but that the arbitral process is not served by admitting all evidence and "taking it for what it is worth." Further, we believe when an advocate's case against a grievant consists entirely of hearsay evidence, and there is no reliable substitute for cross examination or "equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness," the grievant should prevail. Only in the rarest of cases …
Deconstructing Hearsay's Structure: Toward A Witness Recollection Definition Of Hearsay, Marilyn J. Ireland
Deconstructing Hearsay's Structure: Toward A Witness Recollection Definition Of Hearsay, Marilyn J. Ireland
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Confrontation: The Search For Basic Principles, Richard D. Friedman
Confrontation: The Search For Basic Principles, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the accused in a criminal prosecution the right "to be confronted with the Witnesses against him."' The Confrontation Clause clearly applies to those witnesses who testify against the accused at trial. Moreover, it is clear enough that confrontation ordinarily includes the accused's right to have those witnesses brought "face-toface," in the time-honored phrase, when they testify.2 But confrontation is much more than this "face-to-face" right. It also comprehends the right to have witnesses give their testimony under oath and to subject them to crossexamination. 3 Indeed, the Supreme Court has treated the accused's …
Evidence: 1996-1997 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi
Evidence: 1996-1997 Survey Of New York Law, Faust Rossi
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Truth And Its Rivals In The Law Of Hearsay And Confrontation (Symposium: Truth And Its Rivals: Evidence Reform And The Goals Of Evidence Law)." , Richard D. Friedman
Truth And Its Rivals In The Law Of Hearsay And Confrontation (Symposium: Truth And Its Rivals: Evidence Reform And The Goals Of Evidence Law)." , Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In this paper, I will look at the problem of hearsay and confrontation through the lens offered by this symposium's theme of "truth and its rivals." I will ask: To what extent does the law of hearsay and confrontation aspire to achieve the goal of truth in litigation? To what extent does it, or should it, seek to achieve other goals, or to satisfy other constraints on the litigation system? And, given the ends that it seeks to achieve, what should the shape of the law in this area be? My principal conclusions are as follows: In most settings, the …
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
This article draws on the history of the hearsay rule, and on recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, to argue that the right to confrontation should be recognised as a basic principle of the law of evidence, and that aspects of the Law Commission's proposals for reform of the hearsay rule, and of the Home Office's proposals for restrictions on the right of cross-examination, are therefore unsatisfactory.
Hearsay: Traps & Problem Issues, Paul C. Giannelli
Hearsay: Traps & Problem Issues, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.