Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Why Legal Scholars Get Daubert Wrong: A Contextualist Explanation Of Law's Epistemology, Alani Golanski
Why Legal Scholars Get Daubert Wrong: A Contextualist Explanation Of Law's Epistemology, Alani Golanski
Alani Golanski
Daubert requires the court to make judgments about scientific evidence. But judges, like jurors, are lay persons in relation to such evidence. So Daubert has been criticized as requiring too much of the court, and such alternatives as blue ribbon panels have been proposed. This article shows that, notwithstanding any problems that Daubert itself might have, the Daubert scholarship is significantly hampered by the way legal scholars categorize knowledge. A "contextualist" (as opposed to "invariantist") theory of knowledge is both philosophically best, and makes sense of law's relation to science.
Choice And Boundary Problems In Logerquist, Hummert, And Kumho Tire, David H. Kaye
Choice And Boundary Problems In Logerquist, Hummert, And Kumho Tire, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
This article, part of a symposium on the opinion of the Arizona Supreme Court in Logerquist v. McVey, questions that court’s rationales for refusing to apply heightened scrutiny to psychiatric testimony about the retrieval of repressed memories. It also challenges the court’s use of a “personal observations” exception to the heightened scrutiny standard of Frye v. United States. It proposes that a better solution to problems of scientific and expert evidence would be to adopt a sliding scale that attends to the use to which the evidence is put and the degree to which it has been shown to be …
Expert Testimony To Accommodate The Frye, Daubert, And Kumho Tire Standards Of Admissibility, Rhoda B. Billings
Expert Testimony To Accommodate The Frye, Daubert, And Kumho Tire Standards Of Admissibility, Rhoda B. Billings
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Scientific Evidence And The Ethical Obligations Of Attorneys, Michael J. Saks
Scientific Evidence And The Ethical Obligations Of Attorneys, Michael J. Saks
Cleveland State Law Review
This article considers the question: "What are the legal and ethical responsibilities of attorneys when offering scientific expert evidence to courts?" To a lesser extent it considers the responsibilities of attorneys to challenge such evidence when proffered and the ethical dimensions of the working relationship of lawyers and experts. Although the most prominent discussions of such issues have concerned so-called junk science in civil trials, the legal context upon which this article will focus is the criminal trial, where dubious science is more common, less questioned, and has even become institutionalized. The rules and practices of civil cases are provided …