Evidence Commons^™

Working Without A Net: The Third Circuit Juggles Skepticism And Deference Inside The Ring Of Products Liability Experts After The Daubert Trilogy In Pineda V. Ford Motor Co. & (And) Calhoun V. Yamaha Corp., Jennifer E. Burke

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Torts And Innovation, Gideon Parchomovsky, Alex Stein

Michigan Law Review

This Essay exposes and analyzes a hitherto overlooked cost of tort law: its adverse effect on innovation. Tort liability for negligence, defective products, and medical malpractice is determined by reference to custom. We demonstrate that courts' reliance on custom and conventional technologies as the benchmark of liability chills innovation and distorts its path. Specifically, recourse to custom taxes innovators and subsidizes replicators of conventional technologies. We explore the causes and consequences of this phenomenon and propose two possible ways to modify tort law in order to make it more welcoming to innovation.

Harnessing The Hired Guns: The Substantive Nature Of Ohio Revised Code 2743.43 Under Article Iv, Section 5(B) Of The Ohio Constitution, Patrick Vrobel

Journal of Law and Health

Under Article IV, Section 5(B), rules of procedure that impact the substantive rights of Ohio citizens are considered far too important to be encroached upon by the judiciary. Rules affecting substantive rights, therefore, have been expressly delegated to the legislature. Because rules that regulate the competency of medical experts inevitably encroach upon the ability of a tort victim to seek redress in a court of law, such rules impact substantive rights in very real and tangible ways. As a result, the medical expert statute must control. To find otherwise would permit the judiciary to encroach upon the substantive rights of …

La Cesión De Derechos En El Código Civil Peruano, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

La Cesión de Derechos en el Código Civil Peruano

Algunos Apuntes En Torno A La Prescripción Extintiva Y La Caducidad, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

No abstract provided.

A Proposal To Amend Rule 407 Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence To Conform With The Underlying Relevancy Rationale For The Rule In Negligence And Strict Liability Actions, 3 Seton Hall Cir. Rev. 435 (2007), Ralph Ruebner, Eugene Goryunov

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Who Knew? Admissibility Of Subsequent Remedial Measures When Defendants Are Without Knowledge Of The Injuries, Mark G. Boyko, Ryan G. Vacca

Law Faculty Scholarship

Federal Rule of Evidence 407 prohibits the introduction of subsequent remedial measures for the purposes of demonstrating negligence, culpable conduct, or product defect. But the rule breaks down, in application and purpose, when a defendant undertakes the new safety measure after the plaintiff's injury, but before the defendant had knowledge of the loss. Such a situation is not uncommon. Would-be defendants frequently improve their products and product safety for a variety of reasons. Toxic exposure cases, where exposure often predates diagnosis of the injury by a decade or more, represent a prime example of cases where defendants are likely to …

Daubert And The Disappearing Jury Trial, Allan Kanner

ExpressO

Since being decided by the Supreme Court in 1993, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals has earned its place as one of the most misinterpreted and misapplied decisions in modern history. Meant to liberalize the standards for admissions of proof, the decision has had the opposite effect. The gatekeeper powers given to judges via Daubert, coupled with the internal and external incentives to prevent jury trials, has placed our entire civil justice system at risk.

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Reassessing Damages In Securities Fraud Class Actions, Elizabeth C. Burch

ExpressO

No coherent doctrinal statement exists for calculating open-market damages for securities fraud class actions. Instead, courts have tried in vain to fashion common-law deceit and misrepresentation remedies to fit open-market fraud. The result is a relatively ineffective system with a hallmark feature: unpredictable damage awards. This poses a significant fraud deterrence problem from both a practical and a theoretical standpoint.

In 2005, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to clarify open-market damage principles and to facilitate earlier dismissal of cases without compensable economic losses. Instead, in Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo, it further confused the damage issue by (1) perpetuating the …

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

This brief comment suggests where the anti-eminent domain movement might be heading next.

Believing In Products Liability: Reflections On Daubert, Doctrinal Evolution, And David Owen's "Products Liability Law", Richard L. Cupp

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Overlapping Magisteria Of Law And Science: When Litigation And Science Collide, William G. Childs

ExpressO

The Supreme Court’s 1993 decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals transformed courts’ evaluation of expert testimony. Many courts, applying Daubert, focus extensively on whether the purported expert’s methodology has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

This focus on peer review results in two unintended consequences that have triggered criticism: litigation-driven scholarship and litigants taking discovery into the peer review process. Critics contend that litigation-driven scholarship is irredeemably biased and that peer review discovery is too often an effort to intimidate scholars from speaking on subjects of public concern.

In this Article, I explore these phenomena and the criticisms of …

Who Knew - The Admissibility Of Subsequent Remedial Measures When Defendants Are Without Knowledge Of The Injuries, Mark G. Boyko, Ryan G. Vacca

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Los Principios Generales Del Derecho Probatorio Y El Proceso Civil, Dr Leonardo J. Raznovich

Dr Leonardo J Raznovich

This article, written and published for a Spanish speaking audience, provides with a critical comparative overview of the principles of civil procedure and of the law of evidence.

The Accuracy And Manipulability Of Lost Profits Damages Calculations: Should The Trier Of Fact Be "Reasonably Certain"?, Jonathan T. Tomlin, David Merrell

ExpressO

The accuracy and manipulability of calculations for lost profits damages are critical determinants of the ability of harmed parties to receive just compensation in a wide range of legal cases including antitrust, fraud, false advertising, intellectual property infringement, and breach of contract. They are also important determinants of the deterrent effects of the law. Using a sample of over 5,000 U.S. firms, we show that simple damages methods are capable of being substantially inaccurate. We also show that damages methods in general are highly susceptible to manipulation. In the absence of reasonable justifications for why particular data sets and methods …

Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Learning The Wrong Lessons From "An American Tragedy": A Critique Of The Berger-Twerski Informed Choice Proposal, David E. Bernstein

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

This paper is a critique of Margaret Berger and Aaron Twerski, “Uncertainty and Informed Choice: Unmasking Daubert”, forthcoming the Michigan Law Review. Berger and Twerski propose that courts recognize a cause of action that would allow plaintiffs who claim injury from pharmaceutical products, but who do not have sufficient evidence to prove causation, to recover damages for deprivation of informed choice. Berger and Twerski claim inspiration from the litigation over allegations that the morning sickness drug Bendectin caused birth defects. Considering the criteria Berger and Twerski suggest for their proposed cause of action in the context of Bendectin, it appears …

Like Migratory Birds- Latin American Claimants In U.S. Courts And The Ford-Firestone Rollover Litigation, Manuel A. Gómez

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Does Frye Or Daubert Matter? A Study Of Scientific Admissibility Standards, Edward K. Cheng, Albert Yoon

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Nearly every treatment of scientific evidence begins with a faithful comparison between the Frye and Daubert standards. Since 1993, jurists and legal scholars have spiritedly debated which standard is preferable and whether particular states should adopt one standard or the other. These efforts beg the question: Does a state's choice of scientific admissibility standard matter? A growing number of scholars suspect that the answer is no. Under this theory, the import of the Supreme Court's Daubert decision was not in its doctrinal standard, but rather in the general consciousness it raised about the problems of unreliable scientific evidence. This Article …

Spoliation Of Evidence: Why This Evidentiary Concept Should Not Be Transformed Into Separate Causes Of Action, Jason B. Hendren

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proyecto De Ley Sobre Juicio Por Jurados, Dr Leonardo J. Raznovich

Dr Leonardo J Raznovich

This article published in Spanish provides with an assessment of a bill sent to the Argentinean Parliament in order to implement trial by jury for serious criminal matters. It also provides with a historical overview of the institution and with some possible explanations why the Argentinean legislator has been reluctant to fulfill the constitutional mandate of implementing trial by jury for all criminal matters (articles 24, 75 (12) and 118 of the Argentinean Constitution).

Manual De Derecho Procesal Civil, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

No abstract provided.

Changing Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

A number of high-profile toxic tort cases, such as silicone breast implants, have followed a familiar and disturbing path: Early studies suggest a link between a suspected substance and a particular illness. Based on these initial studies, lawsuits are brought and juries award large judgments to various plaintiffs. Then later, more comprehensive studies find no evidence of a causal link. How should the legal system cope with this problem in which new scientific evidence calls into question previous findings of liability? These erroneous judgments seriously harm social welfare and legitimacy. Beneficial products are needlessly discontinued or are made more expensive, …

Constructing Products Liability: Reforms In Theory And Procedure, Frank J. Vandall

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

On The Theory Class's Theories Of Asbestos Litigation: The Disconnect Between Scholarship And Reality, Lester Brickman

Articles

No abstract provided.

Teoría General De La Prueba Judicial, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

No abstract provided.

Spoliation Of Evidence In West Virginia: Do Too Many Torts Spoliate The Broth, Sean R. Levine

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tort Law—Spoliators Beware, But Fear Not An Independent Civil Suit. Goff V. Harold Ives Trucking Co., 342 Ark. 143, 27 S.W.3d 387 (2000)., Margaret A. Egan

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conjunction And Aggregation, Saul Levmore

Michigan Law Review

This Article begins with the puzzle of why the law avoids the issue of conjunctive probability. Mathematically inclined observers might, for example, employ the "product rule," multiplying the probabilities associated with several events or requirements in order to assess a combined likelihood, but judges and lawyers seem otherwise inclined. Courts and statutes might be explicit about the manner in which multiple requirements should be combined, but they are not. Thus, it is often unclear whether a factfinder should assess if condition A was more likely than not to be present - and then go on to see whether condition B …