Evidence Commons^™

The Economic Analysis Of Evidence Law: Common Sense On Stilts, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

There was a time when the empire of Law was not overrun by economists. The economists had their own fiefdoms to be sure-there was the Duchy of Antitrust and the Kingdom of Regulatory Law-but the economists lived in peace within these borders, welcoming many unlike themselves into their midst, only gently proselytizing their students in the first few classes of a term, and swearing fealty to the law. It is true that a few marauders from beyond the borders saw the wealth of the empire and sought to colonize it, but even the most daring, Archbishop Coase and Duke Gary …

Daubert's Backwash: Litigation-Generated Science, William L. Anderson, Barry M. Parsons, Drummond Rennie

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court articulated its position on the admissibility of scientific evidence. The Court reasoned that federal judges should rely on the processes scientists use to identify unreliable research, including the process of peer review, to determine when scientific evidence should be inadmissible. In response, lawyers and their clients, seeking to rely on such evidence, have begun funding and publishing their own research with the primary intention of providing support to cases they are litigating. This Article examines the phenomenon of litigation-generated science, how it potentially undermines …

Title Vii Quid Pro Quo And Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment Claims: Changing The Legal Framework Courts Use To Determine Whether Challenged Conduct Is Unwelcome, Elsie Mata

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In examining the nature of sexual harassment claims, the author challenges the use of the "unwelcomeness" element to distinguish actionable conduct from nonactionable conduct. The author contends that the "unwelcomeness" element demeans women in two ways: (1) it assumes the male perspective and presumes that the plaintiff appreciated the challenged conduct unless she proves otherwise; and (2) it allows the defense to engage in intrusive, irrelevant, and damaging inquiries as it attempts to refute the plaintiff's allegation that the challenged conduct was unwelcome.

The author argues for three reforms. First, courts should shift the burden of proving that the challenged …

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 …

Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Constitutional law scholars have long observed that many doctrinal rules established by courts to protect constitutional rights seem to "overprotect" those rights, in the sense that they give greater protection to individuals than those rights, as abstractly understood, seem to require.' Such doctrinal rules are typically called "prophylactic" rules.2 Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, example of such a rule is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court implemented the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination4 with a detailed set of directions for law enforcement officers conducting custodial interrogations, colloquially called the Miranda warnings. 5

E' Is For Eclectic: Multiple Perspectives On Evidence (Symposium: New Perspectives On Evidence), Richard D. Friedman

Articles

A conference titled "New Perspectives on Evidence: Experts, Empirical Study and Economics" has a pronounced alliterative theme, a theme made even more apparent when, inevitably in evidentiary discourse, epistemological questions come to the fore. It is enough to make one suspect that the conference is secretly brought to you by the letter "E," hiding behind its public front, the Olin Foundation. Putting aside such conspiratorial thoughts, all these "E's" suggest the presence of a meta-"E"-Eclecticism. Indeed, I believe this conference has demonstrated the need for an eclectic approach to evidentiary problems. That should be no surprise. The domain of evidentiary …

A Suggestion On Suggestion, Richard D. Friedman, Stephen J. Ceci

Articles

Part I of the full article briefly describes the history and current slate of research into children's suggestibility. In this part, we argue that, although psychological researchers disagree considerably over the degree to which he suggestibility of young children may lead to false allegations of sexual abuse, there is an overwhelming consensus that children are suggestible to a degree that, we believe, must be regarded as significant. In presenting this argument, we respond to the contentions of revisionist scholars, particularly those recently expressed by Professor Lyon. We show that there is good reason to believe the use of highly suggestive …

Detection Of Deception: The Case Of Handwriting Expertise, Samuel R. Gross

Articles

The basic method of handwriting identification is the same now as it was in Twelfth Night: to compare the questioned writing with other writings by the supposed writer. This can be done from memory if (like Malvolio) one is already familiar with the claimed author's handwriting, or by examining the questioned document together with known samples. It's a simple, obvious task. Any person-certainly any literate person--can have a go at it. The claim by handwriting experts, now and in the past, is equally simple: We can do it better.