Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (8)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- UC Law SF (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
-
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (5)
- Federal Rules of Evidence (4)
- Certainty (3)
- Persuasion (3)
- Probability (3)
-
- Cross-examination (2)
- Excited utterance exception (2)
- Feminist legal theory (2)
- Hearsay rule (2)
- Proof (2)
- Trial advocacy (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Affirmative consent (1)
- Allen (Ronald J.) (1)
- Anecdotes (1)
- Assumption of risk (1)
- Attorney-Client Privilege (1)
- Bayes Theroem (1)
- Bayesian reasoning (1)
- Burden of production (1)
- Common-law (1)
- Confidentiality (1)
- Confrontation right (1)
- Construction (1)
- Contract (1)
- Contributory negligence (1)
- Courts (1)
- Crump (David) (1)
- DNA Evidence (1)
- DNA Wars (1)
Articles 1 - 25 of 25
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Flutes, Oboes And The As If World Of Evidence Law, Richard O. Lempert
Of Flutes, Oboes And The As If World Of Evidence Law, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
Reading Allen's article, I am reminded of a cold war parable I heard during the 1960s. It concerned a flute and an oboe who joined an orchestra one year and immediately set to quarrelling. The flute was distressed because whenever it was playing at its lyrical best the oboe would enter. drowning it out. The oboe was affronted because its deepest, most sonorous passages were invariably ruined by the high-pitched flute butting in. When the orchestra split up for the summer and these quarrelsome instruments went their separate ways, the flute, as it angrily contemplated the oboe, found itself stretching …
Liability For Uncertainty: Making Evidential Damage Actionable, Alex Stein, Ariel Porat
Liability For Uncertainty: Making Evidential Damage Actionable, Alex Stein, Ariel Porat
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Limits Of Cross-Examination, Richard H. Underwood
The Limits Of Cross-Examination, Richard H. Underwood
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
In this article, the author compiles the history and methodology of cross-examination from ancient Greece to the modern era. The reality and ethics of cross-examination are explored through anecdotes and detailed histories.
The Supreme Court's Decision To Recognize A Psychotherapist Privilege In Jaffee V. Redmond, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996): The Meaning Of The Term 'Experience' And The Role Of 'Reason' Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 501, Diane Marie Amann, Edward J. Imwinkelried
The Supreme Court's Decision To Recognize A Psychotherapist Privilege In Jaffee V. Redmond, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996): The Meaning Of The Term 'Experience' And The Role Of 'Reason' Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 501, Diane Marie Amann, Edward J. Imwinkelried
Scholarly Works
In Jaffee v. United States, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996), the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a testimonial privilege protecting the patient-psychotherapist relationship. Its decision is based on Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which permits courts to decide novel questions of privilege in the light of reason and experience. The Court held that this rule authorized not only recognition of a new privilege, but also a privilege of a broad scope, extending to relationships between patients and licensed clinical social workers. Its decision came as a mild surprise, given a widely shared assumption that Rule 501 creates a …
After The Dna Wars: Skirmishing With Nrc Ii, Richard O. Lempert
After The Dna Wars: Skirmishing With Nrc Ii, Richard O. Lempert
Articles
This article traces some of the controversies surrounding DNA evidence and argues that although many have been laid to rest by scientific developments confirmed in the National Research Council's second DNA report, there remain several problems which are likely to lead to continued questioning of standard ways prosecutors present DNA evidence. Although much about the report is to be commended, it falls short in several ways, the most important of which is in its support for presenting random match probabilities independent of plausible error rates. The article argues that although one can sympathize with the NRC committee's decision as an …
On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors Paul F. Rothstein, Et. Al., Office Of The President V. Office Of Independent Counsel, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Allen, Margaret A. Berger, William J. Bridge, Paul C. Giannelli, Stephen Gillers, Laird C. Kirkpatrick, David P. Leonard, Miguel A. Mendez, Roger C. Park, Myrna S. Raeder, John W. Reed, Mark Reutlinger, Leo M. Romero, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Peter Tillers
On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors Paul F. Rothstein, Et. Al., Office Of The President V. Office Of Independent Counsel, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Allen, Margaret A. Berger, William J. Bridge, Paul C. Giannelli, Stephen Gillers, Laird C. Kirkpatrick, David P. Leonard, Miguel A. Mendez, Roger C. Park, Myrna S. Raeder, John W. Reed, Mark Reutlinger, Leo M. Romero, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Peter Tillers
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
This Court should grant review not only because this is a case of national importance and prominence, but also because the decision below is a conspicuous departure from settled principles of evidence law. The panel majority concluded that communications between government lawyers and government officials are not protected by the attorney-client privilege, at least when those communications are sought by a federal grand jury. That conclusion conflicts with the predominant common-law understanding that the attorney-client privilege applies to government entities and that where the privilege applies, it is absolute (i.e., it protects against disclosure in all types of legal and …
Rape Trauma Syndrome, Paul C. Giannelli
Rape Trauma Syndrome, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
Article discusses use of rape trauma syndrom in litigation.
Appellate Review Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert And Joiner, David L. Faigman
Appellate Review Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert And Joiner, David L. Faigman
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections To The Admission Of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, James R. Mccall
Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections To The Admission Of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, James R. Mccall
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Assessment Of Expertise: Transcending Construction, Randolph N. Jonakait
The Assessment Of Expertise: Transcending Construction, Randolph N. Jonakait
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.
Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike
Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike
LLM Theses and Essays
Many jurisdictions have detailed rules of evidence which regulate the facts that are admissible in court. The hearsay rule is one such rule which excludes certain evidence. The hearsay rule has roots in an old common law principle and is featured in many jurisdictions today, but has endured heavy criticisms over time. This paper examines the application of the hearsay rule in the United States and in Nigeria. Both are common law countries, however, the United States’ legal system is more advanced than that of Nigeria. This comparison aims to inform and assist current reform efforts in Nigeria.
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Fernando Laguarda, Michael B. Bressman
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Fernando Laguarda, Michael B. Bressman
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Whoever Fights Monsters Should See To It That In The Process He Does Not Become A Monster: Hunting The Sexual Predator With Silver Bullets -- Federal Rules Of Evidence 413-415 -- And A Stake Through The Heart -- Kansas V. Hendricks, Joelle A. Moreno
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Michael Bressman
Jaffee V. Redmond: Towards Recognition Of A Federal Counselor-Battered Woman Privilege, Michael Bressman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Part I of this Article reviews the Jaffee decision.' Part II discusses the meaning of the Supreme Court's opinion, focusing on the Court's analysis of the important interests at stake in recognizing the asserted testimonial privilege. In Part II, this Article argues that the Court followed the intent of Congress in crafting a psychotherapist- patient privilege. Furthermore, the extension of the privilege to cover confidential communications made to social workers indicates that there is room for further development of the privilege. In Part III, the Article argues that Jaffee provides the foundation for recognition of a counselor-battered woman privilege in …
Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber
Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber
Publications
No abstract provided.
On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley
On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley
Scholarly Works
As a general rule, extrinsic evidence, whether written or oral, is not admissible to prove either the intent of the parties to a contract or the meaning of contractual terms when the parties have executed an unambiguous, fully-integrated (i.e., final and all-inclusive) written agreement. The trial court may consider various types of extrinsic evidence, however, in determining whether a particular agreement is fully integrated or ambiguous, and even in choosing among rival interpretations of an agreement where ambiguity is not present. If the trial court determines that an agreement is not fully integrated, then the trier of fact may consider …
The In/Into Controversy: Lubet Misses The Point, J. Alexander Tanford
The In/Into Controversy: Lubet Misses The Point, J. Alexander Tanford
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman
Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
If I understand them correctly, several leading Bayesioskeptics (Allen, Callen, Stein) acknowledge - with varying degrees of specificity and varying degrees of grudgingness - that standard probability theory can be useful as an analytical tool in considering evidentiary doctrines and the probative value of evidentiary items.
Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman
Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
You may know the standard illustration of chutzpa - the man who kills both his parents and then begs the sentencing court to have mercy on an orphan. In this article, I discuss a case of chutzpa that is nearly as outlandish - the criminal defendant who, having rendered his victim unavailable to testify, contends that evidence of the victim's statement should not be admitted against him because to do so would violate his right to confront her. I contend that in a case like this the defendant should be deemed to have forfeited the confrontation right. On the same …
Irrelevance, Minimal Relevance, And Meta-Relevance (Response To David Crump), Richard D. Friedman
Irrelevance, Minimal Relevance, And Meta-Relevance (Response To David Crump), Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Professor Crump's analysis runs the full traverse from academic theorizing to practical observation. I will attempt to follow him over the same course, addressing three questions among the congeries that he raises. First, is it true that all evidence satisfies the minimalist definition of relevance? Second, should evidentiary codes include a tighter definition of relevance? Third, how should we assess lawyers' use of evidence that, loosely speaking, is irrelevant?
Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman
Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Lack of information distorts litigation. Claims or defenses that a party might prove easily, or that might even be undisputed, in a world of perfect information can be difficult or impossible to prove in the real world of imperfect information. Some information deficiencies are inevitable, at least in the sense that we could not eliminate them without incurring undue social costs. In some cases, however, a person's conduct may have caused the deficiency. More generally, the person may have had available a reasonable alternative course of conduct that would have eliminated, or at least mitigated, the deficiency. Ariel Porat and …
Crime, Politics, And Race (Symposium: Justice And The Criminal Justice Process), Samuel R. Gross
Crime, Politics, And Race (Symposium: Justice And The Criminal Justice Process), Samuel R. Gross
Articles
The biggest problem with the criminal justice system is that too many crimes are committed-too many rapes, too many murders, too many robberies; too much violence that inflicts an untold amount of suffering and destruction on too many people. If that seems obvious, what follows should be equally obvious. The most important step to take to solve the problems of the criminal justice system is to reduce the number of crimes that are committed: to prevent crimes. The best thing we can do to help the victims of crime is to keep them from becoming victims in the first place. …
Evidence In A Different Voice: Some Thoughts On Professor Jonakait's Critique Of A Feminist Approach, Aviva A. Orenstein
Evidence In A Different Voice: Some Thoughts On Professor Jonakait's Critique Of A Feminist Approach, Aviva A. Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman
Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In recent years, some scholars of evidence, myself among them, have made active use of subjective probability theory - what is sometimes referred to as Bayesianism - in thinking about issues and problems related to the law of evidence. But, at the same time, this use has been challenged to various degrees and in various ways by scholars to whom I shall apply the collective, if somewhat misleading, label of Bayesioskeptics. I present this brief paper to defend this use of probability theory, and to discuss what I believe is its proper role in discourse about evidentiary issues.
"My God!": A Feminist Critique Of The Excited Utterance Exception To The Hearsay Rule, Aviva A. Orenstein
"My God!": A Feminist Critique Of The Excited Utterance Exception To The Hearsay Rule, Aviva A. Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.