Law Commons^™

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

In five previous Georgia and Eleventh Circuit evidence survey articles, the author extolled the virtues of the proposed Georgia Rules of Evidence.' These rules roughly tracked the Federal Rules of Evidence and would replace Georgia's existing evidence code which is, in reality, not a code at all but rather a jumble of disjointed statutes found in several different titles of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated and countless court decisions. The proposed rules were first introduced in the General Assembly in 1989 and were approved by the Senate in 1990 and 1991 but have never been reported out of the …

Evidence—Novel Scientific Evidence—Dna Profiling Held Admissible Under The Relevancy Standard. Prater V. State., Ralph Spory

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Child Hearsay Exception In Sexual Abuse Cases—New Arkansas Supreme Court Rule Conflicts With New General Assembly Rule: Which Controls? Vann V. State., Gregory Clay Sandefur

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Payne V. Tennessee: The Supreme Court Places Its Stamp Of Approval On The Use Of "Victim Impact Evidence" During Capital Sentencing Proceedings, Stephen M. Sargent

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stories Versus Theories At The Cardozo Evidence Conference: It's Just Another Metaphor To Me, Lewis H. Larue

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Beyond Maryland V. Craig: Can And Should Adult Rape Victims Be Permitted To Testify By Closed-Circuit Television?, Lisa Hamilton Thielmeyer

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Evidence, Marc T. Treadwell

Mercer Law Review

For the past several years, the State Bar of Georgia has lobbied vigorously for the adoption of a new Georgia Evidence Code based upon the Federal Rules of Evidence. Few would dispute that the existing Georgia Evidence Code, which really is not a code at all but rather an amorphous amalgam of disjointed statutes and thousands of judicial decisions, is in need of revision. Apparently, however, there is considerable dispute regarding exactly what changes should be made.

The proposed Georgia Rules of Evidence is the product of an intensive study by the State Bar of the deficiencies of the existing …

Transport Modeling – Technical And Legal Issues, Adrian Brown

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

27 pages.

Contains footnotes.

The Evolution And Performance Of Groundwater Management Institutions In Southern California, William Blomquist

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

12 pages.

Data, Correspondence, Reports, And Exhibits For Ground Water Rights Cases (Or, Challenges In Developing And Presenting Data To Support A Ground Water Rights Case), Robert E. Brogden

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

17 pages.

Data, Correspondence, Reports And Exhibits For Groundwater Quality/Hazardous Waste Cases: File Preparation And Maintenance, James M. Kerr, Jr.

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

7 pages.

Depositions And Oral Testimony [Outline], M.E. (Sandy) Macdougall

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

16 pages.

Pre-Trial Case Preparation In Complex Groundwater Litigation: The Lawyer’S Role, Michael D. Shimmin

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

12 pages.

Case Preparation: The Expert Witness’ Role, Bruce E. Kroeker

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

9 pages.

The View From The Bench: The Perspective Of A Water Judge, Robert A. Behrman

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

9 pages.

Agenda: Uncovering The Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology And Policy In The 1990s, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Rocky Mountain Ground-Water Conference (1992), Colorado Ground-Water Association

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

Sponsored by Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado School of Law and the Rocky Mountain Ground-Water Conference, organized by the Colorado Ground-Water Association.

Faculty for the conference included University of Colorado School of Law professor Lawrence J. MacDonnell.

Nearly half the people in the United States rely on groundwater as their primary water source. As demands for groundwater grow, it becomes increasingly important for lawyer and technical professionals to understand the legal and hydrologic issues arising in groundwater development, use, and protection. These issues will be the focus of the Center's thirteenth annual summer program, June 15-17, 1992.

This …

The Legal Framework For Aquifer Issues, Douglas L. Grant

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

20 pages.

Contains references.

Practical Considerations For Effective Use Of Expert Witnesses And Computer Models In Complex Groundwater Litigation, William A. Paddock

Uncovering the Hidden Resource: Groundwater Law, Hydrology, and Policy in the 1990s (Summer Conference, June 15-17)

14 pages.

The Worst Evidence Principle: The Best Hypothesis As To The Logical Structure Of Evidence Law, Edward J. Imwinkelried

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science In The Courtroom, John F. Baughman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom by Peter W. Huber

When The Blue Bus Crashes Into The Gate: The Problem With People V. Collins In The Probabilistic Evidence Debate, Mark L. Huffman

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Experts As Hearsay Conduits: Confrontation Abuses In Opinion Testimony, Ronald L. Carlson

Scholarly Works

The dispute over whether litigants may use experts to run unexamined hearsay into the trial record is a microcosm of a larger debate. The larger question is whether judicial review of expert testimony should be passive, or whether the expert witness process should be marked by active judicial policing. Does the plethora of expert opinions presently being offered in modern trials merit special scrutiny by the courts?

Some scholars urge that courts must accommodate experts. Proponents of this view favor few challenges to the unrestricted rendition of opinions by an expert, whether the expert is real or self-proclaimed. Under this …

Struggling To Stop The Flood Of Unreliable Expert Testimony, David L. Faigman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Juror Decision Making And The Evaluation Of Hearsay Evidence, Roger C. Park, Peter Miene, Eugene Borgida

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of Litigation Services Directory, James S. Heller

Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

Evidence Of Religion And The Religion Of Evidence, Michael Ariens

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Biased Evidence Rules: A Framework For Judicial Analysis And Reform, Randolph N. Jonakait

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Admissibility Of Hearsay Under The Confrontation Clause: Reliability Requirement For Hearsay Admitted Under A Non-"Firmly Rooted" Exception - Idaho V. Wright, A. Perry Wadsworth Jr.

Campbell Law Review

This note discusses the facts of Idaho v. Wright, examines the history of the admissibility of hearsay under the Confrontation Clause, and analyzes the Wright decision. This note concludes that by excluding the use of corroborative evidence in determining the trustworthiness of non-firmly rooted hearsay, the Court enhances Confrontation Clause protection for criminal defendants, but perhaps at the expense of some crime victims, such as sexually abused children.

Proof In Law And Science, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

This article addresses proof in both science and law. Both disciplines utilize proof of facts and proof of theories, but for different purposes and, consequently, in different ways. Some similarities exist, however, in how both disciplines use a series of premises followed by a conclusion to form an argument, and thus constitute a logic. This article analyzes the ways in which legal logic and scientific logic differ. Finding facts in law involves the same logic but quite different procedures than scientific fact-finding. Finding, or rather constructing, the law is also very different from scientific theorizing. But such differences do not …

On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, Brief Of Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., National Association Of Manufacturers, Business Roundtable, And Chemical Manufacturers Association As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, William Daubert And Joyce Daubert, Individually And As Guardians Ad Litem For Jason Daubert, And Anita De Young, Individually And As Gaurdian Ad Litem For Eric Schuller V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Paul F. Rothstein, Victor E. Schwartz, Robert P. Charrow, Scott L. Winkelman, Edward C. Wu, Richard Duesenberg, David F. Zoll, Donald D. Evans, Jan S. Amundson, Edward P. Good

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

The Federal Rules of Evidence exclude expert scientific testimony when it has been developed without regard for accepted scientific methods.

This case focuses on expert scientific evidence. Such evidence plays a vital and often dispositive role in modern litigation. For scientific evidence to be helpful to the factfinder it must meet some minimal threshold of reliability. To hold otherwise would be to allow a system of adjudication based more on chance than on reason.