Law Commons^™

The Disappointing History Of Science In The Courtroom: Frye, Daubert, And The Ongoing Crisis Of “Junk Science” In Criminal Trials, Jim Hilbert

Faculty Scholarship

Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use of science in courtrooms. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals , the Court addressed widespread concerns that courts were admitting unreliable scientific evidence. In addition, lower courts lacked clarity on the status of the previous landmark case for courtroom science, Frye v. United States. In the years leading up to the Daubert decision, policy-makers and legal observers sounded the alarm about the rise in the use of "junk science" by so-called expert witnesses. Some critics went so far as to suggest that American businesses …

Neuroscience In Forensic Contexts: Ethical Concerns, Stephen J. Morse

All Faculty Scholarship

This is a chapter in a volume, Ethics Challenges in Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology Practice, edited by Ezra E. H. Griffith, M.D. and to be published by Columbia University Press. The chapter addresses whether the use of new neuroscience techniques, especially non-invasive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and the data from studies employing them raise new ethical issues for forensic psychiatrists and psychologists. The implicit thesis throughout is that if the legal questions, the limits of the new techniques and the relevance of neuroscience to law are properly understood, no new ethical issues are raised. A major ethical lapse …

Video: Adding To Your Case: Examining And Cross Examining Expert Witnesses, Michael J. Dale, Kathryn Webber, Valerie B. Barnhart Esq., Jack L. Harari M.D., J.D., F.A.A.E.M.

NSU Law Seminar Series

Learn skills for using expert witness testimony at trial: Developing strategy for selecting topics and order of presentation Using proper form of questioning on direct and cross Understanding rules of evidence, procedure, and ethics Two role play demonstrations help you learn techniques

The Limits Of Textualism In Interpreting The Confrontation Clause, Stephanos Bibas

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Economic Analysis Of Fact Witness Payment, Eugene Kontorovich, Ezra Friedman

Faculty Working Papers

In this paper we discuss the disparate treatment of perceptual (''fact'') witnesses and expert witnesses in the legal system. We highlight the distinction between the perceptual act of witnessing and the act of testifying, and argue that although there might be good reasons to regulate payments to fact witnesses, the customary prohibition on paying them for their services is not justified by reference to economic theory. We propose considering a court mediated system for compensating fact witnesses so as to encourage witnessing of legally important events.We construct a simple model of witness incentives, and simulate the effects of several possible …

Blind Expertise, Christopher Robertson

Faculty Scholarship

The United States spends many billions of dollars on its system of civil litigation, and expert witnesses appear in a huge portion of cases. Yet litigants select and retain expert witnesses in ways that create the appearance of biased hired guns on both sides of every case, thereby depriving factfinders of a clear view of the facts. As a result, factfinders too often arrive at the wrong conclusions, thus undermining the deterrence and compensation functions of litigation. Court-appointment of experts has been widely proposed as a solution, yet it raises legitimate concerns about accuracy and has failed to gain traction …

What's Wrong With Litigation-Driven Science? An Essay In Legal Epistemology, Susan Haack

Articles

No abstract provided.

Prosecutors, Ethics, And Expert Witnesses, Paul C. Giannelli, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

Commentators who have examined the DNA exonerations have noted the disturbing role that prosecutors have played in these wrongful convictions. Another significant contributor to these miscarriages of justice is the misuse of expert testimony, a third of the cases according to some sources. This Article examines the intersection of these two factors - the prosecutor's role in using and presenting expert testimony.

Prosecutorial misconduct may occur during most stages of a trial, beginning with the selection of witnesses, including the improper "shopping" for experts. Additional abuses occur when prosecutors fail to abide by rules governing the pretrial disclosure of scientific …

Gatekeeping After Gilbert: How Lawyers Should Address The Court's New Emphasis, Brian Benner, Ronald L. Carlson

Popular Media

In the world of modern trials, expert witnesses are the coin of the realm. Lawyers know that most of the time, experts are case-breakers. Their demeanor, knowledge, and presentation ability are key qualities. Accordingly, their persuasive effect on modern lay jurors makes it incumbent on judges to ensure that an expert's opinions are appropriately directed. That means not allowing an economist to testify about the medical dynamics of bone disease, for example.

Reconsidering The Medical Expert Witness System, Yunwei Jiang

LLM Theses and Essays

The expert witness is indispensable in a medical malpractice case. However, there are three main defects in the currently existing expert witness system. One is incompetence of expert witnesses. Another is professional negligence of expert witnesses. The other is dishonesty of expert witnesses. To make the expert witness system more efficient, this article examines currently existing rules and offers some proposals regarding the three issues. For the first one, the suggestion of this article is to rely on the standards of expert qualification and admitting expert testimony. For the second one, this article distinguishes expert witnesses from lay witnesses, and …

Jurors' Evaluations Of Expert Testimony: Judging The Messenger And The Message, Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovic, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Jurors are laypersons with no specific expert knowledge, yet they are routinely placed in situations in which they need to critically evaluate complex expert testimony. This paper examines jurors' reactions to experts who testify in civil trials and the factors jurors identify as important to expert credibility. Based on in-depth qualitative analysis of interviews with 55 jurors in 7 civil trials, we develop a comprehensive model of the key factors jurors incorporate into the process of evaluating expert witnesses and their testimony. Contrary to the frequent criticism that jurors primarily evaluate expert evidence in terms of its subjective characteristics, the …

Trials And Tribulations: Science In The Law, Susan Haack

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Other Shoe Drops: Minnesota Rejects Daubert, Peter B. Knapp

Faculty Scholarship

In 1991, the United States Supreme Court handed decided Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., rejecting the long-standing federal test for the admissibility of scientific testimony articulated in Frye v. United States. Unlike many states, however, which embraced Daubert within years--or even months--of the federal decision, Minnesota declined to make Daubert the law of the jurisdiction. In a pair of cases decided in 2000, Goeb v. Tharaldson and Sentinel Mgmt. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety, the court held that Minnesota would retain the general acceptance test. The court's rejection of Daubert can be read as an attempt to give the …

Expert Testimony On Fingerprints: An Internet Exchange, Richard D. Friedman, David H. Kaye, Jennifer Mnookin, Dale Nance, Michael Saks

Articles

In United States v. Llera Plaza, 188 F. Supp. 2d 549 (E.D. Pa. 2002), a federal district initially limited expert opinion testimony on fingerprint identifications because the government was unable to show that such identifications were sufficiently valid and reliable under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Then, the court withdrew the opinion. This article reproduces an exchange of notes on the initial opinion submitted by five law professors.

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.

Evidence Issues In Domestic Violence Civil Cases, Jane C. Murphy, Jane H. Aiken

All Faculty Scholarship

New laws and policies aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence have been adopted across the country over the last twenty years.The legal approaches taken to protect battered women and control family violence have resulted in significant changes in family law. New laws include statutes permitting civil protection or restraining orders, and laws requiring that domestic violence be considered in custody and/or visitation decisions. Both of these types of statutory reforms can provide protection to adult victims of domestic violence and their children. Evaluating a parent's fitness by considering past acts of violence to other family members results in decisions …

Substance And Form In Scientific Evidence: What Daubert Didn't Do, Samuel R. Gross

Book Chapters

On its face, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals was about as easy a case as the Supreme Court gets. The plaintiffs claimed that their birth defects were caused by the anti-nausea drug Bendectin, which their mothers had used during their gestation. In response to a motion for summary judgment by the defendant, the plaintiffs presented affidavits of eight expert witnesses who offered their opinions - based on a variety of studies - that Bendectin was indeed the culprit. The federal district court that heard the motion granted summary judgment to the defendant, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. Both lower courts …

"X-Spurt" Witnesses, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In this article the author pulls together a history of expert witnesses in common law systems. Various issues are explored regarding expert witness testimony, including: the historical underpinnings of the practice, how Daubert controls that issue in modern times, rules of evidence, psychological science, and professional ethics.

Agenda: Uncovering The Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology And Policy In The 1990s, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Rocky Mountain Ground-Water Conference (1992), Colorado Ground-Water Association

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

Sponsored by Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado School of Law and the Rocky Mountain Ground-Water Conference, organized by the Colorado Ground-Water Association.

Faculty for the conference included University of Colorado School of Law professor Lawrence J. MacDonnell.

Nearly half the people in the United States rely on groundwater as their primary water source. As demands for groundwater grow, it becomes increasingly important for lawyer and technical professionals to understand the legal and hydrologic issues arising in groundwater development, use, and protection. These issues will be the focus of the Center's thirteenth annual summer program, June 15-17, 1992.

This …

Should Michigan Rule Of Evidence 703 Be Revised?, Brian Benner, Ronald L. Carlson

Popular Media

Technical witnesses regularly assist the fact-finding process in Michigan trials. Jury or bench trials in federal and state courts routinely feature the appearance of experts. Properly policed by our courts, few forms of testimony hold more promise for advancing the truth-seeking function of American litigation. The expanding presence of experts raises hard questions. Are the Michigan rules in turn with modern needs? Should the state rule controlling the basis for expert opinion be aligned with the federal pattern? If Michigan Rule of Evidence 703 could stand revision, does proper alteration require significant additions not presently contained in either state or …

Expert Evidence, Samuel R. Gross

Articles

It seems that the use of expert witnesses in common law courts has always been troublesome. In his Treatise on the Law of Evidence, first published in 1848, Judge John Pitt Taylor describes several classes of witnesses whose testimony should be viewed with caution, including: enslaved people (which accounts for "the lamentable neglect of truth, which is evinced by most of the nations of India, by the subjects of the Czar, and by many of the peasantry in Ireland"); women (because they are more susceptible to "an innate vain love of the marvelous"); and "foreigners and others ... living out …

Modern Evidence And The Expert Witness, Faust Rossi

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Opinions And Expert Testimony, John W. Reed

Book Chapters

Article VI of the Michigan Rules of Evidence contains the rules dealing with witnesses. Trials bring to mind testimonial evidence. There surely are other kinds of evidence, such as docmnents, guns, automobile tires, chemical substances, and the like. But most evidence comes from the mouths of witnesses, and even demonstrative evidence usually is admitted only after a witness has taken the stand and testified to foundation facts. So it is important and appropriate that we turn to the provisions of the rules that deal with qualifications and credibility of witnesses. I would like to direct your attention to MRE 601 …

Witness--Competency Of An Allopathic Expert In The Field Of Homeopathy--Opinion On Very Fact The Jury Must Determine, Victor H. Lane

Articles

Van Sickle v. Doolittle, (Ia., 1918), 169 N. W. 141, was an action for malpractice against a physician of the homeopathic school of medicine. Upon the trial, a physician of the allopathic school was called, and after testifying that he was unskilled in the science of homeopathy, was allowed to testify that the treatment shown to have been given to the patient by defendant, would produce no physiological effect, and that proper treatment required the giving of such medicines as would produce such effect. This was held error upon the ground that the defendant was called to treat the patient …

Examination Of The Medical Expert, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

The expert witness differs essentially from the ordinary witness in at least two particulars; first, in that the field of his testimony is outside the range of ordinary knowledge and experience; and, secondly, in that his testimony in the great majority of cases is in the form of opinions or conclusions that are deemed necessary for the proper guidance of the jury. It goes without saying that the 'lawyer who undertakes the examination of the expert should have such familiarity with the subject of inquiry as will enable him to develop it through the expert logically and clearly, but unfortunately …

The Physician As An Expert, Harry B. Hutchins

Articles

Expert evidence is evidence of a scientific or technical character in regard to a matter that is outside the domain of ordinary experience and knowledge. The evidence is usually in the form of opinions or conclusions based upon facts that for the purposes of an opinion are assumed to be true, although it may be in regard to scientific facts. The expert is one who has had special training or opportunities in a particular subject that the ordinary witness has not enjoyed, and who has thereby acquired certain habits of judgment.that render his explanations and opinions in the field of …

Compensation Of Experts, Henry W. Rogers

Articles

The law relating to the compensation of experts is somewhat unsettled, and the cases are not numerous in which the subject has been considered. This very fact, however, lends additional interest to the subject, and the question is one of great importance. In some of the States the law expressly provides that when a witness is summoned to testify as an expert he shall be entitled to extra compensation. Such a provision may be found in the laws of Iowa, of North Carolina, and of Rhode Island.