Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Expert Testimony And "Subtle Discrimination" In The Workplace: Do We Now Need A Weatherman To Know Which Way The Wind Blows?, Deborah Dyson
Expert Testimony And "Subtle Discrimination" In The Workplace: Do We Now Need A Weatherman To Know Which Way The Wind Blows?, Deborah Dyson
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Comment studies Elsayed in order to investigate these questions. The Background discussion traces the two great lines of cases whose trajectories cross in Elsayed, the Daubert v. Merrell Dow expert testimony jurisprudence under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the McDonnell Douglas v. Green line of cases establishing the "pretext" model of proof for individual employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Then, turning to the opinion proper, the Analysis considers Elsayed under the following headings: (A) The Crux: The Court's Harmless-Error Determination, (B) Decoding in the Pretext Context, (C) Substituting the Mixed-Motives Regime …
Raising The Standard For Expert Testimony: An Unwarranted Obstacle In Proving Claims Of Child Sexual Abuse In Dependency Hearings, Matthew J. Dulka
Raising The Standard For Expert Testimony: An Unwarranted Obstacle In Proving Claims Of Child Sexual Abuse In Dependency Hearings, Matthew J. Dulka
Golden Gate University Law Review
This comment will examine the Amber B. court's decision to characterize evidence provided by the mental health professionals as scientific evidence and not as expert opinion. Secondly, this comment will explore the desirability of imposing the scientific evidence standard, usually applied in criminal cases, to dependency hearings. Finally, this comment will discuss the implications of the Amber B. decision in light of the already present evidentiary difficulties of proving child sexual abuse claims and the social policy of protecting the welfare of the abused child.
Survey: Women And California Law, Elaine Booras
Survey: Women And California Law, Elaine Booras
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Role Of Expert Witnesses In German And U.S. Civil Litigation, Sven Timmerbeil
The Role Of Expert Witnesses In German And U.S. Civil Litigation, Sven Timmerbeil
Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law
The U.S. and German civil trial systems differ not only in many details but also regarding their fundamentals. The U.S. civil trial system seems to be basically a battle of the parties in which the lawyers are protagonists and warlords. The judge has most often only a passive role. In contrast, in German civil litigation, the judge generally has a very active role. The judge controls the proceedings, examines the witnesses and is always the decision maker. Other differences include the lack of pre-trial discovery in Germany and the important role of court experts in German civil litigation. Due to …