Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Helping Good Lawyers Help Clients Make Good Decisions About Dispute Resolution, John M. Lande
Helping Good Lawyers Help Clients Make Good Decisions About Dispute Resolution, John M. Lande
Faculty Publications
Counseling clients about dispute resolution options is easier said than done. These can be complex and difficult decisions, and lawyers may not have appropriate resources to help lawyers counsel clients in choosing dispute resolution options. While establishing rules requiring this kind of training may help to remedy this shortcoming, perhaps the most promising involves using dispute systems design (DSD) procedures to establish better ways of training lawyers to counsel clients.
Scientific Evidence In Criminal Prosecutions - A Retrospective, Paul C. Giannelli
Scientific Evidence In Criminal Prosecutions - A Retrospective, Paul C. Giannelli
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
A Decision-Theoretic Rule Of Reason For Minimum Resale Price Maintenance, Thom Lambert
A Decision-Theoretic Rule Of Reason For Minimum Resale Price Maintenance, Thom Lambert
Faculty Publications
This article evaluates these approaches from the perspective of decision theory and, finding each lacking, proposes an alternative approach to structuring the rule of reason governing RPM. Part II sets forth the decision-theoretic perspective, which seeks to maximize the net benefits of liability rules by minimizing the sum of decision and error costs. Part III then evaluates, from the standpoint of decision theory, the proposed approaches to evaluating instances of RPM. Part IV proposes an alternative evaluative approach that is more consistent with decision theory’s insights.
Adverse Inference About Adverse Inferences: Restructuring Juridical Roles For Responding To Evidence Tampering By Parties To Litigation, Dale A. Nance
Adverse Inference About Adverse Inferences: Restructuring Juridical Roles For Responding To Evidence Tampering By Parties To Litigation, Dale A. Nance
Faculty Publications
For at least two centuries, Anglo-American courts have responded to a party's evidence tampering by allowing the opponent to argue to jurors that they should draw an adverse inference against the offending party in deciding the merits of the case. This Article argues that the use of such inferences, and invitations to draw them, should be radically curtailed, not only because of the ambiguities and risks of prejudice that such inferences entail, but more importantly because they reflect and contribute to a confusion of roles in which the jury is enlisted to participate in the management of the pre-trial conduct …