Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Pepperdine University (7)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- New York Law School (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
-
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Pepperdine Law Review (6)
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (3)
- NYLS Law Review (2)
- Touro Law Review (2)
-
- Akron Law Review (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- Georgia State University Law Review (1)
- Journal of Business & Technology Law (1)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (1)
- Maine Law Review (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process (1)
- UNH Sports Law Review (1)
- University of Richmond Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 31
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Anything You Say (Or Like, Repost, And Quote) Can Be Used Against You, Alexandra Heyl
Anything You Say (Or Like, Repost, And Quote) Can Be Used Against You, Alexandra Heyl
Catholic University Law Review
Social media allows users to exchange thoughts and ideas without saying a single word. Whether a user “likes” “reposts” or “quotes” third-party content, a user publicly interacts with content authored by someone else with the click of a button. Is this online activity more akin to a user making a statement, adopting a third-party’s statement, or not making a statement at all? Does it matter? Only certain statements can be used against you at trial. Federal Rule of Evidence (“Federal Rule”) 802(a) provides that “hearsay” is an out-of-court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted. According to Federal …
The History Of Forensic-Science Evidence In Criminal Trials And The Role Of Early “Success” In Establishing Its Putative Reliability, Carrie Leonetti
The History Of Forensic-Science Evidence In Criminal Trials And The Role Of Early “Success” In Establishing Its Putative Reliability, Carrie Leonetti
St. Mary's Law Journal
This Article posits the history of forensic-science evidence plays a significant role in the unquestioning manner of its modern acceptance. It traces early high-profile forensic science “successes” and the public reactions to them. It argues the public perception of the “advances” of forensic science continues to play a role in the lack of scrutiny given to these disciplines in admissibility decisions today. It concludes, when it comes to forensic science, history should play a different role by serving as a critical warning rather than a congratulatory buttress.
For Whom The Sol Tolls: Examining The Role Of The Discovery Rule And Statutes Of Limitations In Ncaa Concussion Litigation, Joseph Sabin Esq., Andrew L. Goldsmith Ph.D.
For Whom The Sol Tolls: Examining The Role Of The Discovery Rule And Statutes Of Limitations In Ncaa Concussion Litigation, Joseph Sabin Esq., Andrew L. Goldsmith Ph.D.
UNH Sports Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Seattle University Law Review
This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.
We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …
Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret
Assertion And Hearsay, Richard Lloret
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
This article explores the characteristics and functions of assertion and considers how the term influences the definition of hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801. Rule 801(a) defines hearsay by limiting it to words and conduct intended as an assertion, but the rule does not define the term assertion. Courts and legal scholars have focused relatively little attention on the nature and definition of assertion. That is unfortunate, because assertion is a robust concept that has been the subject of intense philosophic study over recent decades. Assertion is not a mere cypher standing in for whatever speech or conduct one …
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)
Due Process People V. Scott (Decided June 5, 1996)
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Non-Physician Vs. Physician: Cross-Disciplinary Expert Testimony In Medical Negligence Litigation, Marc D. Ginsberg
Non-Physician Vs. Physician: Cross-Disciplinary Expert Testimony In Medical Negligence Litigation, Marc D. Ginsberg
Georgia State University Law Review
The source of the applicable standard of care in a specific medical negligence claim is multifaceted. The testifying expert witness, when explaining the applicable standard of care, “would draw upon his own education and practical frame of reference as well as upon relevant medical thinking, as manifested by literature, educational resources and information available to practitioners, and experiences of similarly situated members of the profession.” Accordingly, in typical medical negligence litigation, the plaintiff’s expert witness testifying regarding the existence of and the defendant-physician’s deviation from the standard of care would be a physician. Why, then, have courts permitted non-physicians to …
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Life After Daubert V. Merrell Dow: Maine As A Case Law Laboratory For Evidence Rule 702 Without Frye, Leigh Stephens Mccarthy
Maine Law Review
In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Supreme Court grappled not with case law but with fundamental questions about the nature of science and its role in law. The court in Daubert addressed the problematic issue of admissibility of expert scientific testimony. In the end the Court rejected as an exclusionary rule the venerable standard set in 1923 by Frye v. United States. Frye held that scientific testimony was to be excluded unless it had gained “general acceptance” in its field. Daubert held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence …
Florida's "Brave New World": The Transition From Frye To Daubert Will Transform The Playing-Field For Litigants In Medical Causation Cases, Erica W. Rutner, Lara B. Bach
Florida's "Brave New World": The Transition From Frye To Daubert Will Transform The Playing-Field For Litigants In Medical Causation Cases, Erica W. Rutner, Lara B. Bach
Barry Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hypnosis In Our Legal System: The Status Of Its Acceptance In The Trial Setting, Joel R. Hlavaty
Hypnosis In Our Legal System: The Status Of Its Acceptance In The Trial Setting, Joel R. Hlavaty
Akron Law Review
Hypnosis is a method of therapy which has been utilized by society for quite some time. Recently, it has gained popularity as a new device to be used in the trial setting. Although it is a legitimate method of therapy in the medical and psychological professions, in the hands of attorneys and the legal system it takes on a whole new life. This new life is plagued with questions of admissibility, reliability and suggestibility. This comment will examine these questions and the use of hypnosis in the various stages of trial. This paper will show that some courts hold such …
Obtaining International Judicial Assistance Under The Federal Rules And The Hague Convention On The Taking Of Evidence Abroad In Civil And Commercial Matters: An Exposition Of The Procedures And A Practical Example: In Re Westinghouse Uranium Contract Litigation, Robert J. Augustine
Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law
No abstract provided.
Is Limited Remand Required If The District Court Admitted Or Excluded Evidence Without A Daubert Analysis?, Robert B. Gilbreath
Is Limited Remand Required If The District Court Admitted Or Excluded Evidence Without A Daubert Analysis?, Robert B. Gilbreath
The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
No abstract provided.
Character, Liberalism, And The Protean Culture Of Evidence Law, Daniel D. Blinka
Character, Liberalism, And The Protean Culture Of Evidence Law, Daniel D. Blinka
Seattle University Law Review
It is time to rethink character evidence. Long notorious as the most frequently litigated evidence issue, character doctrine plagues courts, trial lawyers, and law students with its infamously “grotesque” array of nonsensical rules, whimsical distinctions, and arcane procedures. Character is a calculation of social worth and value; it is the sum total of what others think of us, whether expressed as their own opinion or the collective opinions of many (reputation). Once we grasp that character is a social construct, we are in a better position to address some of the problems that plague evidence law. To provide needed clarity …
Argument And Courtroom Theatrics, Larry Geller, Peter Hemenway
Argument And Courtroom Theatrics, Larry Geller, Peter Hemenway
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
The Discovery And Use Of Computerized Information: An Examination Of Current Approaches, Richard M. Long
The Discovery And Use Of Computerized Information: An Examination Of Current Approaches, Richard M. Long
Pepperdine Law Review
In recent years, the legal profession has run head on into the increasing use of computers and computerized information. Discovery and evidentiary rules developed to deal with written documentation may not be flexible enough to adequately cover this relatively new method of storing information. This comment examines various methods by which courts have attempted to deal with discovery and evidentiary problems involving computerized information, and suggests certain areas that should be explored in supporting or attacking the credibility of such information.
Logic, Not Evidence, Supports A Change In Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated By The Supreme Court For Scientific Expert Testimony Are Inappropriate And Inefficient When Applied In Patent Infringement Suits, Claire R. Rollor
Journal of Business & Technology Law
No abstract provided.
Adult Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse And The Statute Of Limitations: The Need For Consistent Application Of The Delayed Discovery Rule, Gregory G. Gordon
Adult Survivors Of Childhood Sexual Abuse And The Statute Of Limitations: The Need For Consistent Application Of The Delayed Discovery Rule, Gregory G. Gordon
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar
Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Testimony For Sale: The Law And Ethics Of Snitches And Experts, George C. Harris
Testimony For Sale: The Law And Ethics Of Snitches And Experts, George C. Harris
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Trial Objections From Beginning To End: The Handbook For Civil And Criminal Trials, Craig Lee Montz
Trial Objections From Beginning To End: The Handbook For Civil And Criminal Trials, Craig Lee Montz
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Unpredictable And Inconsistent: Nevada's Expert Witness Standard After Higgs V. State, Ryan A. Henry
Unpredictable And Inconsistent: Nevada's Expert Witness Standard After Higgs V. State, Ryan A. Henry
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law And Procedure, Marla G. Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Standards Of Evidence In Administrative Proceedings, William H. Kuenhle
Standards Of Evidence In Administrative Proceedings, William H. Kuenhle
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rethinking The Role Of Expert Testimony Regarding The Reliability Of Eyewitness Identifications In New York, Scott Woller
Rethinking The Role Of Expert Testimony Regarding The Reliability Of Eyewitness Identifications In New York, Scott Woller
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael: The Supreme Court Follows Up On The Daubert Test, Martin A. Schwartz
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Twist And Shout And Truth Will Out: An Argument For The Adoption Of A "Safety-Valve" Exception To The Washington Hearsay Rule, George R. Nock
Twist And Shout And Truth Will Out: An Argument For The Adoption Of A "Safety-Valve" Exception To The Washington Hearsay Rule, George R. Nock
Seattle University Law Review
This Article will focus on two decisions of the Washington Supreme Court illustrating the unfortunate expansion of certain hearsay exceptions in order to accommodate truth, show that the expansion could have been avoided had Washington adopted a "general" exception comparable to that found in the Federal Rules of Evidence, and propose the adoption of an exception shorn of the defects of the rejected federal version.
The Theory Of Criminal Discovery And The Practice Of Criminal Law, David W. Louisell
The Theory Of Criminal Discovery And The Practice Of Criminal Law, David W. Louisell
Vanderbilt Law Review
To crystallize in a few words the motif of a career as varied and comprehensive as that of Eddie Morgan would in any event be difficult, but it is doubly so for a life devoted, as his has been, to stuff as vital and dynamic as procedure and evidence. For me, his work most fundamentally is to be characterized as a quest for greater rationality in the adjudicative process. Whether one thinks of his analysis of the hearsay rule,' or his rationale of the admissions exception to it, or his treatment of the dead man's statute, or his study of …
The Civil Investigative Demand: New Fact-Finding Powers For The Antitrust Division, Richard L. Perry, William Simon
The Civil Investigative Demand: New Fact-Finding Powers For The Antitrust Division, Richard L. Perry, William Simon
Michigan Law Review
The complexity, scope and length of modem antitrust litigation bring to prominence the procedures by which evidence - particularly documentary evidence - is discovered and placed before the courts and administrative agencies. Fact-finding mechanisms now available for ferreting out and prosecuting violations make up an imposing array. These include the grand jury subpoena, the discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure and the subpoena and visitorial powers of certain administrative agencies. The "civil investigative demand," a precomplaint compulsory process, is a new weapon proposed to be added to this arsenal. Few dispute the desirability of new …
Rules Of Evidence -- Substantive Or Procedural?, Edmund M. Morgan
Rules Of Evidence -- Substantive Or Procedural?, Edmund M. Morgan
Vanderbilt Law Review
It hardly needs stating that the definition of a legal word or term depends upon the purpose for which it is to be defined. If in framing a generalization designed to state a rule or make a discrimination applicable in a specific topic or field of the law, the courts use specified terms, it by no means follows that they intend those terms to be understood in the same sense in generalizations dealing with problems in another topic or field. The words, substance or substantive and procedure or procedural, have been used most frequently in three separate situations: (1) in …