Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Expert evidence (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Admissible evidence (1)
- Canada (1)
- Circuit split (1)
-
- Class action litigation (1)
- Class certification (1)
- Courts (1)
- Eleventh Circuit (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Evidentiary standard (1)
- Expert witnesses (1)
- Fact finding (1)
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- Investigations (1)
- Judicial efficiency (1)
- Motion in limine (1)
- Scientific testimony (1)
- Standard for admissibility (1)
- United States (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Gatekeeping & Class Certification: The Eleventh Circuit’S Stringent Approach To Admitting Expert Evidence In Support Of Class Certification, Pravin Patel, Mark Pinkert, Patrick Lyons
Gatekeeping & Class Certification: The Eleventh Circuit’S Stringent Approach To Admitting Expert Evidence In Support Of Class Certification, Pravin Patel, Mark Pinkert, Patrick Lyons
University of Miami Law Review
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 is silent on whether evidence offered in support of a motion for class certification must be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. The Supreme Court has not addressed this issue, and there is currently no authoritative framework for incorporating all or some of the federal evidentiary rules into the class certification process. Resultantly, circuit courts are split on this question and have coalesced among several different approaches. The Eleventh Circuit follows a rigorous evidentiary standard in which evidence offered in support of class certification generally must be admissible under the Federal Rules of …
A Match Made On Earth: Getting Real About Science And The Law, Susan Haack
A Match Made On Earth: Getting Real About Science And The Law, Susan Haack
Articles
Modern legal systems increasingly depend on scientific testimony; but they also need somehow to ensure, so far as possible, that fact-finders aren't misled by highly speculative, poorly-conducted, or dishonestly-presented science. The Critical Common-sensist understanding of science that the author has developed in Defending Science and elsewhere sheds some light on why these interactions between law and science have proven so problematic. But Ms. Acharya's approach to these difficult issues rests on a flawed conception of the supposed "scientific method, " and an idea of legal "legitimacy" too weak to bear the weight she places on it; and her claim that …
Trials And Tribulations: Science In The Law, Susan Haack
Trials And Tribulations: Science In The Law, Susan Haack
Articles
No abstract provided.