Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Disclosure (2)
- 801(d)(1)(b) (1)
- Attorney-client privilege (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Citizen suits (1)
-
- Civil procedure (1)
- Class action (1)
- Colorado Rules of Evidence (1)
- Common law (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence (1)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Injunctive relief (1)
- Premotive rule (1)
- Prior consistent statements (1)
- Public interest litigation (1)
- Rehabilitative evidence (1)
- Rule 23(b)(2) (1)
- Rule 502 (1)
- State politics (1)
- Structural reform litigation (1)
- Substantive evidence (1)
- Tome v. United States (1)
- Transparency (1)
- Waiver (1)
- Work product protection (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Saving The Public Interest Class Action By Unpacking Theory And Doctrinal Functionality, Suzette M. Malveaux
Saving The Public Interest Class Action By Unpacking Theory And Doctrinal Functionality, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
Colorado Rule Of Evidence 502: Preserving Privilege And Work Product Protection In Discovery, Christopher B. Mueller, Ronald J. Hedges, Lino S. Lipinsky
Colorado Rule Of Evidence 502: Preserving Privilege And Work Product Protection In Discovery, Christopher B. Mueller, Ronald J. Hedges, Lino S. Lipinsky
Publications
No abstract provided.
Prior Consistent Statements: The Dangers Of Misinterpreting Recently Amended Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(B), Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Christopher B. Mueller
Prior Consistent Statements: The Dangers Of Misinterpreting Recently Amended Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(B), Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
A recent amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) expands the situations in which prior consistent statements by testifying witnesses can be used as substantive evidence, and not merely as rehabilitating evidence. In this piece, the Authors argue that the revised rule may mislead judges and lawyers to conclude that prior consistent statements are always usable as substantive evidence when offered to rehabilitate a witness. Nothing could be further from the truth. The intent, although hard to discern on the face of the revised rule, is only to allow substantive use of consistent statements that are otherwise admissible to rehabilitate …
In The Shadows Of Sunlight: The Effects Of Transparency On State Political Campaigns, Abby K. Wood, Douglas M. Spencer
In The Shadows Of Sunlight: The Effects Of Transparency On State Political Campaigns, Abby K. Wood, Douglas M. Spencer
Publications
In recent years, the courts have invalidated a variety of campaign finance laws while simultaneously upholding disclosure requirements. Courts view disclosure as a less-restrictive means to root out corruption while critics claim that disclosure chills speech and deters political participation. Using individual-level contribution data from state elections between 2000 and 2008, we find that the speech-chilling effects of disclosure are negligible. On average, less than one donor per candidate is likely to stop contributing when the public visibility of campaign contributions increases. Moreover, we do not observe heterogeneous effects for small donors or ideological outliers despite an assumption in First …