Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Admissibility (1)
- Appellate courts (1)
- Bias (1)
- Civil Commitements (1)
- Civil cases (1)
-
- Daubert (1)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Exclusions (1)
- Expert Witnesses (1)
- Expert evidence (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- General Electric Co. v. Joiner (1)
- Inc. (1)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1)
- Reliability (1)
- Scientific evidence (1)
- Testimony (1)
- Trials (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Validity (1)
- Witnesses (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Daubert & Danger: The "Fit" Of Expert Predictions In Civil Commitments, Alex Scherr
Daubert & Danger: The "Fit" Of Expert Predictions In Civil Commitments, Alex Scherr
Scholarly Works
The opinions of experts in prediction in civil commitment hearings should help the courts, but over thirty years of commentary, judicial opinion, and scientific review argue that predictions of danger lack scientific rigor. The United States Supreme Court has commented regularly on the uncertainty of predictive science. The American Psychiatric Association has argued to the Court that "[t]he professional literature uniformly establishes that such predictions are fundamentally of very low reliability." Scientific studies indicate that some predictions do little better than chance or lay speculation, and even the best predictions leave substantial room for error about individual cases. The sharpest …
Daubert Asks The Right Questions: Now Appellate Courts Should Help Find The Right Answers, Christopher B. Mueller
Daubert Asks The Right Questions: Now Appellate Courts Should Help Find The Right Answers, Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
No abstract provided.
Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin
Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin
Articles
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 speaks in very general terms. It governs every situation in which "scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact," and provides that, in that situation, "a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise . . . .' In 2000, following a trio of Supreme Court cases interpreting Rule 702, the Rule was amended to include a third requirement, in addition to the helpfulness of the testimony and the qualifications of the witness: reliability. Under Rule 702 …