Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence: Of Privileges And The Division Of Rule-Making Power, Michigan Law Review
The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence: Of Privileges And The Division Of Rule-Making Power, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note proposes that the lower federal courts accord the same binding authority to the Proposed Rules that they give those judicially promulgated procedural rules, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that have been implicitly approved by Congress.
Part I of the Note analyzes the constitutional division of the rule-making power by examining both the policy considerations involved and the relevant constitutional language and doctrines. That examination indicates that the power to establish such rules is shared by Congress and the Supreme Court. To determine when that power is appropriately exercised by one branch rather than the other, …
Jurors' Impeachment Of Verdicts And Indictments In Federal Court Under Rule 606(B), Christopher B. Mueller
Jurors' Impeachment Of Verdicts And Indictments In Federal Court Under Rule 606(B), Christopher B. Mueller
Publications
No abstract provided.
Inherent Judicial Power: Flexibility Congress Did Not Write Into The Federal Rules Of Evidence , Michael M. Martin
Inherent Judicial Power: Flexibility Congress Did Not Write Into The Federal Rules Of Evidence , Michael M. Martin
Faculty Scholarship
This Article focuses on the question whether, or to what extent, a federal court is bound by the explicit and implicit restrictions placed by Congress on a court's power to admit evidence. This is a question that did not arise prior to adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence because previous prospective rulemaking in the procedural area was in truth a judicial exercise. Although Congress had an implicit veto power over rules of procedure prescribed by the Supreme Court, it never exercised that power. Thus, a lower court's decision to disregard a rule of procedure raised, as a practical matter, …
The Federal Rules Of Evidence And The Quality Of Practice In Federal Courts, Stephen A. Saltzburg
The Federal Rules Of Evidence And The Quality Of Practice In Federal Courts, Stephen A. Saltzburg
Cleveland State Law Review
One point that I shall endeavor to make today is that the Federal Rules of Evidence offer an opportunity for dramatic improvement in federal trial court practice. In the hands of the most experienced practitioner or the novice litigator just weaned from law school, the evidence rules offer a promise of even-handed justice that has heretofore been unavailable. Used properly, the Federal Rules of Evidence hold out a promise that trials might be less costly to litigants in terms of out-of-pocket expenditures, that the societal costs associated with erroneous decisions by trial judges might be reduced, and that federal litigants' …