Law Commons^™

The Acquisition Of Scientific Evidence Between Frye And Daubert. From Ad Hominem Arguments To Cross-Examination Among Experts, Lorenzo Zoppellari

OSSA Conference Archive

The Frye and Daubert rulings give us two very different ways to intend the relation between law and science. Through the contributions of Wellman and Walton, we will see how the main method to question the expert’s testimony before a judge deferent to science is to question her personal integrity by using ad hominem arguments. Otherwise, using Alvin Goldman’s novice/expert problem, we will investigate if other manners of argumentative cross-examinations are possible.

Faces On The Court House Steps, A. F. Neumann

Michigan Law Review

Judge Frank may one day write a book which it will be possible to take or leave, but I doubt it. Few writers, with his ability and insight in the field of administration of justice, I suppose, succeed in evoking in their readers the spirited reactions that his writings produce. This is the highest praise that any reader can bestow-even though his reaction be a spirited disagreement.

In his most recent book, Courts on Trial, he has attempted to· destroy what he calls "myths" in legal thinking describing the fact-finding process just as he did for the rule determination …