Law Commons^™

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.

The Second Circuit Review--1975-76 Term: Courts-- Evidence & Procedure: Commentary: The Second Circuit And The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The most significant development in federal trial procedure in recent years has been the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence, effective July 1, 1975. In the intervening two years since the Rules became effective, the courts of the Second Circuit have bad occasion to make several illuminating applications of and references to them.

An examination of some of these decisions provides insight into the kinds of questions that are coming up not only in the Second Circuit, but around the country, and the kinds of answers that are being given. It is not the bizarre or unusual case that …

Evidence Problems In Criminal Cases, John W. Reed

Book Chapters

The Federal Rules of Evidence, enacted by Congress, became effective on July 1, 1975. Ten states have adopted state versions of the Federal Rules to govern trials in their courts, and about half the remaining states are considering whether to follow suit. Michigan is one of these latter states. Early in 1977 a committee appointed by the Supreme Court of Michigan proposed rules of evidence for Michigan closely patterned on the Federal Rules, and, if all goes well, the Court will promulgate rules for the Michigan courts to become effective in 1977 or soon thereafter. Michigan lawyers should be aware …

A Review Of The Proposed Michigan Rules Of Evidence, James K. Robinson, John W. Reed

Articles

On January 6, 1977, the Supreme Court of Michigan entered an order stating that it is considering adoption of the proposed Michigan Rules of Evidence which were submitted to the Court by the committee which it appointed in March 1975. The Court has solicited comments from interested persons regarding the proposed rules. A copy of the Supreme Court's order is published in this issue of the Bar Journal. The proposed rules are published in the January 26, 1977, issue of North Western Reporter, Second Series (Michigan Edition). The purpose of this article is to review in general the background and …

An Evidence Code: The American Experience, Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Professor Paul Rothstien's opening address at the Conference on Current Trends in Evidence, Dalhousie University, 26th November 1976.

Rothstein discusses the American Evidence Code, the American experience with it, and compares it to a proposed Code that Canada is considering.

Bad News And Good News, John W. Reed

Articles

I have been asked to visit with you about some of my current interests in the evidence field, in which I teach. When you invite an academic lawyer to speak at your meeting, you obviously expect of him something other than the latest hot tips on trial strategy and tactics, something other than a speech entitled "Reflections on My Last Eleven Victories in Court." Others can do that for you, probably at lunch - or, even better, at cocktails with the successes more impressive and the defeats more forgivable under the influence of an ounce or two of alcohol.

The Federal Rules Of Evidence And Florida Evidence Law Compared, David K. Miller

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Credibility And Character: A Different Look At An Interminable Problem, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The problems of character evidence "resolved" by the new Federal Rules are problems that involve the structure of human personality. The judgmental processing by jurors of character information involves a behavioral transaction called interpersonal perception. Each of these psychological problems has been intensively investigated for nearly 40 years. As the character problems of the law now take on the appearance of having been solved, there is not the slightest indication that the results of this scientific endeavor influenced the choices made by the law. The solutions to these problems composed by the Judicial Conference and embraced by the Supreme Court …

The Admissibility Of Social Science Evidence In Person-Oriented Legal Adjudication, Ira P. Robbins

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Substantive Use Of Prior Inconsistent Statements Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Walker Jameson Blakey

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Practitioner's Guide To The Federal Rules Of Evidence

University of Richmond Law Review

On July 1, 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence went into effect. President Ford's signature on Public Law 93-595 was the culmination of nearly twenty years of study, drafting, and debate. Obviously the decision to codify federal evidence law was not lightly made, but the desire for uniformity ultimately made the Rules possible. As with all major legislation, compromise was necessary and certain areas of the law were left untouched. Criminal presumptions represent one such area. In other areas, such as privilege, only minimal codification was possible. The final result is a good set of rules, but one which might …

Bad News And Good News, John W. Reed

Other Publications

Law schools do one thing superbly well: they teach the intellectual skills of reasoning, of distinction drawing, of deductive and inductive logic, of anlysis and synthesis. These are heavily verbal skills, at least in the context in which lawyers employ them, and students are tested for their mastery of these skills by written examinations. If one does well, he or she is placed on the law review, where these particular skills are honed even further.

Judicial Notice: An Exercise In Exorcism, E. F. Roberts

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Scope Of Cross-Examination And The Proposed Federal Rules, Ronald L. Carlson

Scholarly Works

In analyzing the proposed Federal Rules of Evidence, the drafting work of the Advisory Committee should not be overlooked. This is easy to do when any particular rule is isolated and criticized. For the most part, the total rules package prepared by the Advisory Committee represents a commendable effort to provide a needed set of uniform rules for federal trials. The ideas contained in the new rules are almost invariably well researched. When oversights or omissions in treatment do appear, however, it is well to raise these points for discussion. Congress is reviewing the Proposed Federal Rules, and the final …

Congressional Discretion In Dealing With The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Stuart M. Lockman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

On November 20, 1972, the Supreme Court, pursuant to statutory authority, adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence. The new rules of evidence were not to take effect, however, until ninety days after they had been submitted to Congress. The rules were officially submitted on February 5, 1973, but even before that date they had become the subject of extensive legislative debate. While some attorneys praise the codification of evidence rules as a progressive step, others maintain that certain of these promulgations will have an objectionable impact on the federal judicial system or that the Supreme Court has exceeded its authority …

Former-Testimony Exception In The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence, The , Michael M. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

According to one member of the Advisory Committee which drafted them, the proposed Rules of Evidence for the United States Courts and Magistrates were promulgated to "improve the truth-finding capacity of the courts," as well as to provide the benefits of simplification and uniformity. In much the same way that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have led to modernization of procedural rules in many states, the proposed Federal Rules of Evidence may be the vehicle by which improvements unsuccessfully codified in the Model Code of Evidence and the Uniform Rules of Evidence can finally be achieved across the United …