Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2008

Evidence

Alex Stein

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Trial-Time/Forum Principle And The Nature Of Evidence Rules, Alex Stein Dec 2007

The Trial-Time/Forum Principle And The Nature Of Evidence Rules, Alex Stein

Alex Stein

This Article examines two principles that settle temporal and jurisdictional conflicts between evidentiary rules: the trial-time principle and the forum principle. Under the trial-time principle, evidentiary rules that exist at the time of the trial override rules that existed before trial when the relevant action or transaction took place. Under the forum principle, evidentiary rules of the court’s jurisdiction override rules applicable in the jurisdiction in which the relevant action or transaction took place. These principles control the application of rules categorized as strictly evidentiary, as opposed to substantive. The Article explains, criticizes and refines this categorization.


The Right To Silence Helps The Innocent: A Response To Critics, Alex Stein Dec 2007

The Right To Silence Helps The Innocent: A Response To Critics, Alex Stein

Alex Stein

This contribution to the Cardozo Law Review symposium on the future of the Fifth Amendment responds to the numerous critics of Daniel J. Seidmann & Alex Stein, The Right to Silence Helps the Innocent: A Game-Theoretic Analysis of the Fifth Amendment Privilege, 114 HARV. L. REV. 430 (2000).

Under Seidmann and Stein’s theory, the right to silence protects innocents who find themselves unable to corroborate their self-exonerating accounts by verifiable evidence. Absent the right, guilty criminals would pool with innocents by making false self-exonerating statements. Factfinders would consequently discount the probative value of all uncorroborated exculpatory statements, at the expense …


Torts And Innovation, Alex Stein, Gideon Parchomovsky Dec 2007

Torts And Innovation, Alex Stein, Gideon Parchomovsky

Alex Stein

This Essay exposes and analyzes a hitherto overlooked cost of the current design of tort law: its adverse effect on innovation. Tort liability for negligence, defective products, and medical malpractice is determined by reference to custom. We demonstrate that courts’ reliance on custom and conventional technologies as the benchmark of liability chills innovation and distorts its path. Specifically, the recourse to custom taxes innovators and subsidizes replicators of conventional technologies. We explore the causes and consequences of this phenomenon and propose two possible ways to modify tort law in order to make it more welcoming to innovation.