Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Impeachment Of Party By Prior Inconsistent Statement In Compromise Negotiations: Admissibility Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 408, Fred S. Hjelmeset
Impeachment Of Party By Prior Inconsistent Statement In Compromise Negotiations: Admissibility Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 408, Fred S. Hjelmeset
Cleveland State Law Review
This note will explore the concept of compromise and the public policy in furtherance of compromise and settlement, and then discuss whether Rule 408,in its current form, is maximizing its potential to effectively serve that public policy. The note concludes that an amendment extending Rule 408's protective reach to exclude a party's prior inconsistent statements in compromise negotiations from admission into evidence for impeachment purposes would strengthen the inducement to settle claims without erecting any new substantial obstacles in the way of the truth-finding process. The central rationale is that, if the laws permit compromise negotiations to become arenas where …
An Opinion: Federal Judges Misconstrue Rule 704 (Or Is That An Impermissible Legal Conclusion), Kathy Jo Cook
An Opinion: Federal Judges Misconstrue Rule 704 (Or Is That An Impermissible Legal Conclusion), Kathy Jo Cook
Cleveland State Law Review
This article addresses the need to formulate a uniform and predictable approach to the admissibility of expert opinion testimony which relates the law to the facts. First, it briefly discusses the history of expert opinion testimony. Second, it discusses, through a case analysis, the difficult, if not impossible task that courts have assumed in attempting to differentiate between two types of expert opinions: (1) those which are, by their nature, factual; and (2) those which require some level of legal analysis-directly relating the law to the facts of the case. Finally, this article suggests an alternative approach which is arguably …