Law Commons^™

Proving Copying, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

Faculty Scholarship

Proof that a defendant actually copied from a copyrighted work is a critical part of a claim for copyright infringement. Indeed, absent such copying, there is no infringement. The most common method of proving copying involves the use of circumstantial evidence, consisting of proof that a defendant had “access” to the protected work, and a showing of “similarities” between the copy and the protected work. In inferring copying from the combination of such evidence, courts have for many decades developed a framework known as the “inverse ratio rule,” which allows them to modulate the level of proof needed on access …

General Editor's Introduction To The Treatise, Richard D. Friedman

Other Publications

There is a story -- recalled rather wistfully by an American in 1995, shortly after the thrashing of Young America by New Zealand's Black Magic -- that in 1851 Queen Victoria came to watch the first race for what became known as the America's Cup. “Who is leading?” she asked the signal master of the royal yacht. “The America,” came the reply. “Which boat is in second place?” the Queen wanted to know. The signal master replied: “There is no second, ma'am.'DD'

This story -- which, though perhaps apocryphal, has gained a life of its own -- captures perfectly the …

Racial Character Evidence In Police Killing Cases, Jasmine Gonzales Rose

Faculty Scholarship

The United States is facing a twofold crisis: police killings of people of color and unaccountability for these killings in the criminal justice system. In many instances, the officers’ use of deadly force is captured on video and often appears clearly unjustified, but grand and petit juries still fail to indict and convict, leaving many baffled. This Article provides an explanation for these failures: juror reliance on “racial character evidence.” Too often, jurors consider race as evidence in criminal trials, particularly in police killing cases where the victim was a person of color. Instead of focusing on admissible evidence, jurors …

Spreigl Evidence: Still Searching For A Principled Rule, Ted Sampsell-Jones

Faculty Scholarship

This article first examines how Minnesota’s character evidence doctrine developed, with a particular focus on the historical confusion regarding the propriety of the propensity inference. It then examines current case law and argues that Minnesota’s current Spreigl doctrine routinely allows propensity evidence. It finally proposes a choice between abandoning the current Spreigl doctrine and repealing the character rule itself. The author takes no position on which alternative should be chosen, but either is better than the status quo. The current doctrine in Minnesota is a Potemkin village.

The Expanding Use Of The Res Gestae Doctrine, H. Patrick Furman, Ann England

Publications

This article provides a brief history of the doctrine of res gestae and an analysis of its current usage in both Colorado state and federal courts.

Cross-Examination Earlier Or Later: When Is It Enough To Satisfy Crawford?, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Crawford At Two: Testimonial Hearsay And The Confrontation Clause, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This article addresses the response of Colorado courts, and that of certain other jurisdictions, to the 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Crawford v. Washington.

The Character Of Discrimination Law: The Incompatibility Of Rule 404 And Employment Discrimination Suits, Lisa Marshall Manheim

Articles

This Note illustrates how violations of Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (which prohibits litigants from relying on certain propensity proofs) occur routinely. It demonstrates that the ineffectiveness of the ban in the context of discrimination suits cannot be blamed on clever lawyers or negligent judges, but rather is a predictable consequence of the dearth of evidence available to discrimination plaintiffs. This Note concludes by arguing that this subtle but problematic incongruity justifies a reform of the Rule.

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 …

Built On Lies: Preliminary Reflections On Evidence Law As An Autopoetic System, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

This Symposium on Truth and Its Rivals seems most concerned with what one might think of as the "output" side of evidence law that is, whether the rules of evidence enhance the likelihood that trial verdicts will capture the true state of the matter giving rise to the litigation. From this perspective, the legitimate rivals to truth are values that may justify decisions that eclipse the truth. The most obvious examples are rules of privilege, which allow probative information to remain concealed even where it is essential to accurate fact finding.

Of Flutes, Oboes And The As If World Of Evidence Law, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

Reading Allen's article, I am reminded of a cold war parable I heard during the 1960s. It concerned a flute and an oboe who joined an orchestra one year and immediately set to quarrelling. The flute was distressed because whenever it was playing at its lyrical best the oboe would enter. drowning it out. The oboe was affronted because its deepest, most sonorous passages were invariably ruined by the high-pitched flute butting in. When the orchestra split up for the summer and these quarrelsome instruments went their separate ways, the flute, as it angrily contemplated the oboe, found itself stretching …

Incoming Drug Calls And Performative Words: They're Not Just Talking About It, Baron Parke!, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Introduction Of Scientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Insuring Reliable Fact Finding In Guidelines Sentencing: Why Not Real Evidence Rules, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Meta-Evidence: Do We Need It?, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Post-Modern Hearsay Reform: The Importance Of Complexity, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Some Caveats Concerning Dna As Criminal Identification Evidence: With Thanks To The Reverend Bayes, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

The conference panel at which this paper was originally presented was structured along the lines of a debate. The three speakers who were supposed to advocate the use of DNA evidence were labeled, as is customary, Proponents. But those who were supposed to take the negative side were not called Opponents. Rather they were labeled Caveators. I do not know who is responsible for this label, but I think it gets things exactly right. To my mind anyone considering DNA as criminal identification evidence should be a Caveator. The promise and utility of DNA analysis in identifying the perpetrators of …

Prior Inconsistent Statements, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

The New Evidence Scholarship: Analyzing The Process Of Proof, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

When I began teaching evidence seventeen years ago, the field was moribund. The great systematizers of the common law-Wigmore, Maguire, McCormick, Morgan and their ilk-had come and, if they had not all already gone, their work was largely finished. Not only was most of what passed for evidence scholarship barely worth the reading-the same, after all, could be said of many fields of law at most times-but disregarding student work, few scholars were writing regularly on evidentiary matters.

Historical Truth, Narrative Truth, And Expert Testimony, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Federal Coconspirator Exception: Action, Assertion, And Hearsay, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Assaults On The Exclusionary Rule: Good Faith Limitations And Damage Remedies, Pierre J. Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Jurors' Impeachment Of Verdicts And Indictments In Federal Court Under Rule 606(B), Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

Prior Consistent Statements, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

No abstract provided.

Instructing The Jury Upon Presumptions In Civil Cases: Comparing Federal Rule 301 With Uniform Rule 301, Christopher B. Mueller

Publications

No abstract provided.

An Essay On The Determination Of Relevancy Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Arthur H. Travers Jr.

Publications

The scope of the general definition of "relevant evidence" in the Federal Rules of Evidence is ambiguous. It is unclear whether Congress, for instance, intended that certain issues be considered legislatively determined or that those issues rest within the discretion of the courts. There is also some uncertainty over the definition's applicability to several types of evidence--particularly undisputed facts such as those that provide background information or are judicially admitted.

Privileges In The Law Of Evidence: The Realities Of Attorney-Client Confidences, Robert Allen Sedler, Joseph J. Simeone

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Right To Inspect Memoranda Used To Revive Recollection, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Weight And Admissibility Of Chemical Tests As Evidence Of Intoxication, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Current Decision, Due Process--Use Of Blood Tests To Determine Intoxication Not Violative Of Due Process, Howard Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.