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

Law Commons

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

Evidence

2013

Discipline
Institution
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 91 - 112 of 112

Full-Text Articles in Law

Evidentiary Standards In The Legal Malpractice Trial-Within-A-Trial., F. Parks Brown Jan 2013

Evidentiary Standards In The Legal Malpractice Trial-Within-A-Trial., F. Parks Brown

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Like malpractice actions in general, the standards of proof required for each element of a legal malpractice claim evolved as legal malpractice claims became increasingly common. State and federal courts consequently produced a diverse range of opinions as jurisdictions continually adjust to evolving standards. The courts often seek to balance these standards of proof against their own precedent and the need to serve their particular notions of equity and justice. Perhaps the most contentious of these evolving standards of proof is the current state of the causation element, which is a critical test that must be satisfied to prevail in …


Giving Purpose To Your Life As A Legal Writer, David Spratt Jan 2013

Giving Purpose To Your Life As A Legal Writer, David Spratt

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.


Images In/Of Law, Jessica Silbey Jan 2013

Images In/Of Law, Jessica Silbey

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.


Reconceptualizing The Burden Of Proof, Edward K. Cheng Jan 2013

Reconceptualizing The Burden Of Proof, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The preponderance standard is conventionally described as an absolute probability threshold of 0.5. This Essay argues that this absolute characterization of the burden of proof is wrong. Rather than focusing on an absolute threshold, the Essay reconceptualizes the preponderance standard as a probability ratio and shows how doing so eliminates many of the classical problems associated with probabilistic theories of evidence. Using probability ratios eliminates the so-called Conjunction Paradox, and developing the ratio tests under a Bayesian perspective further explains the Blue Bus problem and other puzzles surrounding statistical evidence. By harmonizing probabilistic theories of proof with recent critiques advocating …


Logic, Not Evidence, Supports A Change In Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated By The Supreme Court For Scientific Expert Testimony Are Inappropriate And Inefficient When Applied In Patent Infringement Suits, Claire R. Rollor Jan 2013

Logic, Not Evidence, Supports A Change In Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated By The Supreme Court For Scientific Expert Testimony Are Inappropriate And Inefficient When Applied In Patent Infringement Suits, Claire R. Rollor

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.


Introduction: Persecution Through Prosecution: Revisiting Touro Law Center’S Conference In Paris On The Dreyfus Affair And The Leo Frank Trial, Rodger D. Citron Jan 2013

Introduction: Persecution Through Prosecution: Revisiting Touro Law Center’S Conference In Paris On The Dreyfus Affair And The Leo Frank Trial, Rodger D. Citron

Touro Law Review

This piece provides the introduction for the Dreyfus affair. It gives a brief overview of the actual Dreyfus affair and outlines the articles in this volume.


Visual Jurisprudence, Richard Sherwin Jan 2013

Visual Jurisprudence, Richard Sherwin

Articles & Chapters

Lawyers, judges, and jurors face a vast array of visual evidence and visual argument inside the contemporary courtroom. From videos documenting crimes and accidents to computer displays of their digital simulation, increasingly, the search for fact-based justice is becoming an offshoot of visual meaning making. But when law migrates to the screen it lives there as other images do, motivating belief and judgment on the basis of visual delight and unconscious fantasies and desires as well as actualities. Law as image also shares broader cultural anxieties concerning not only the truth of the image, but also the mimetic capacity itself, …


Fifty: Shades Of Grey--Uncertainty About Extrinsic Evidence And Parol Evidence After All These Ucc Years, David G. Epstein Jan 2013

Fifty: Shades Of Grey--Uncertainty About Extrinsic Evidence And Parol Evidence After All These Ucc Years, David G. Epstein

Law Faculty Publications

Lawyers and judges have been working with the Uniform Commercial Code for about fifty years. Most states adopted the Uniform Commercial Code between 1960 and 1965.

Notwithstanding these years of experience and the importance of certainty to parties entering into commercial transactions, there is still considerable confusion over the use of extrinsic evidence, parol evidence and the parol evidence rule in answering the questions (1) what are the terms of a contract for the sale of goods and (2) what do those contract terms mean. No "black and white rules"-just various "shades of grey."

This essay explores the reasons for …


The Promise And Pitfalls Of Empiricism In Educational Equality Jurisprudence, Lia Epperson Jan 2013

The Promise And Pitfalls Of Empiricism In Educational Equality Jurisprudence, Lia Epperson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.


She Acts Guilty: Sexually Charged Consciousness Of Guilt Evidence Should Be Excluded Because It Is Biased Against Women., Colin Caffrey Jan 2013

She Acts Guilty: Sexually Charged Consciousness Of Guilt Evidence Should Be Excluded Because It Is Biased Against Women., Colin Caffrey

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

A lawyer may submit sexually charged evidence under a consciousness of guilt theory. Utilizing this type of evidence convicts women based on their character, not for their alleged crimes, in criminal cases across America. Consciousness of guilt evidence holds bias because it exploits common gender stereotypes in order to obtain criminal convictions. Sexually charged evidence does not directly show a defendant’s guilt, but simply allows the jury to infer guilt based on a defendant’s conduct. Violating gender norms or reacting to the occurrence of a tragedy differently than one might normally expect is not an admission of guilt. Sexually charged …


Five Answers And Three Questions After United States V. Jones (2012), The Fourth Amendment Gps Case, Benjamin Priester Jan 2013

Five Answers And Three Questions After United States V. Jones (2012), The Fourth Amendment Gps Case, Benjamin Priester

Journal Publications

Each year, the United States Supreme Court's docket includes a range of "high profile" cases that attract attention not merely from law professors and others with an acquired fascination with the Court, but also from a general audience of law students, lawyers, scholars and commentators on American politics and society, as well as, occasionally, the public at large. During the 2011 Term, one of those cases was "the GPS case," formally known as United States v. Jones.' Media coverage of the case spread far beyond the legal blogosphere to a wide variety of mainstream and popular sources, both in print …


Child Testimony And The Right To Present A Defense, Stephen A. Saltzburg Jan 2013

Child Testimony And The Right To Present A Defense, Stephen A. Saltzburg

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This article discusses the importance of a child's testimony in a criminal prosecution by examining Harris v. Thompson, 698 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. 2012). In this case, a child's testimony was excluded, violating the defendant's right to present a complete defense.


The Pastor, The Burning House, And The Double Jeopardy Clause: The True Story Behind Evans V. Michigan, David A. Moran Jan 2013

The Pastor, The Burning House, And The Double Jeopardy Clause: The True Story Behind Evans V. Michigan, David A. Moran

Articles

The true story behind Evans v. Michigan is that a man who was probably innocent, and who would almost certainly have been acquitted by the jury, had his trial shortened after it became obvious to the judge that the police had picked up a man who had nothing to do with the fire. In other words, the facts set forth by the Michigan Supreme Court, and repeated by Alito, were grossly misleading. And because I, like Alito, believed the Michigan Supreme Court’s version of the facts, I made a silly mistake when I agreed to take the case. That silly …


Empirical Fallacies Of Evidence Law: A Critical Look At The Admission Of Prior Sex Crimes, Tamara Rice Lave, Aviva Orenstein Jan 2013

Empirical Fallacies Of Evidence Law: A Critical Look At The Admission Of Prior Sex Crimes, Tamara Rice Lave, Aviva Orenstein

Articles

In a significant break with traditional evidence rules and policies, Federal Rules of Evidence 413-414 allow jurors to use the accused's prior sexual misconduct as evidence of character and propensity to commit the sex crime charged. As reflected in their legislative history, these propensity rules rest on the assumption that sexual predators represent a small number of highly deviant and recidivistic offenders. This view of who commits sex crimes justified the passage of the sex-crime propensity rules and continues to influence their continuing adoption among the states and the way courts assess such evidence under Rule 403. In depending on …


Speaking Science To Law, Deborah Hussey Freeland Dec 2012

Speaking Science To Law, Deborah Hussey Freeland

Deborah M. Hussey Freeland

involving a strong scientific consensus, the powerful qualities of scientific knowledge are easily lost in translation. Moreover, even prominent scientists who are committed to providing accurate information to legal fact-finders may suffer reputational harm simply for participating in an adversarial process.

This article analyzes the connection between law and science through the expert witness from the perspectives of epistemology and cross-cultural communication, focusing on the distinct ways in which scientists and lawyers know, value and express their knowledge. When a lawyer meets with a scientific expert witness, more confusion attends their interaction than either likely realizes. Linguistic translation is necessary--but …


Misconvictions: When Law & Science Collide, Jane Moriarty Dec 2012

Misconvictions: When Law & Science Collide, Jane Moriarty

Jane Campbell Moriarty

Forthcoming 2013.


New York Law Of Domestic Violence, Deseriee Kennedy Dec 2012

New York Law Of Domestic Violence, Deseriee Kennedy

Deseriee A. Kennedy

NEW YORK LAW OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, 3rd ed., is a comprehensive 2-volume, 7-chapter, hardbound treatise published by West (Thomson-Reuters). The treatise is the seminal authority on domestic violence in New York State covering New York State laws and relevant U.S. Supreme Court cases. The authors of the book are Professor Breger (Albany Law School, Albany, NY), Professor Kennedy (Touro School of Law, Central Islip, NY), Jill M. Zuccardy, Esq. (New York City), and now retired Judge Lee Hand Elkins (formerly Brooklyn Family Court). The treatise and its authors have been cited as authority repeatedly by trial and appellate courts, as …


Federal Objections - Quick Reference Card (2nd Edition) ( Forthcoming), Sydney Beckman Dec 2012

Federal Objections - Quick Reference Card (2nd Edition) ( Forthcoming), Sydney Beckman

Sydney A. Beckman

No abstract provided.


Brain Trauma, Pet Scans And Forensic Complexity, Jane Moriarty, Daniel Langleben, James Provenzale Dec 2012

Brain Trauma, Pet Scans And Forensic Complexity, Jane Moriarty, Daniel Langleben, James Provenzale

Jane Campbell Moriarty

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is a medical imaging technique that can be used to show brain function. Courts have admitted PET scan evidence in cases involving brain damage, injury, toxic exposure, or illness ("brain trauma") and to support claims of diminished cognitive abilities and impulse control. Despite the limited data on the relationships between PET, brain trauma and behavior, many courts admit PET scan evidence without much critical analysis. This article examines the use of PET as proof of functional impairment and justification of abnormal behavior by explaining its diagnostic use and limitations, the limited support for claims of its …


Opposing Mr. Big In Principle, David Milward Dec 2012

Opposing Mr. Big In Principle, David Milward

Dr. David Milward

No abstract provided.


Skating Too Close To The Edge: A Cautionary Tale For Tax Practitioners About The Hazards Of Waiver, Claudine Pease-Wingenter Dec 2012

Skating Too Close To The Edge: A Cautionary Tale For Tax Practitioners About The Hazards Of Waiver, Claudine Pease-Wingenter

Claudine Pease-Wingenter

The Federal Rules of Evidence defer to common law in establishing the rules of attorney-client privilege. As a general matter, such an approach creates a fairly uncertain legal landscape as each court articulates the baseline rules somewhat differently. The varied judicial applications of those differing rules can then exacerbate the uncertainty even more.

Unfortunately, in the area of tax law, the rules and their application are particularly uncertain because attorneys and accountants have overlapping responsibilities to clients and the courts have historically refused to recognize an accountant-client privilege. During my approximately eight years practicing corporate tax law, I was acutely …


Evidence, Probability, And The Burden Of Proof, Ronald J. Allen, Alex Stein Dec 2012

Evidence, Probability, And The Burden Of Proof, Ronald J. Allen, Alex Stein

Alex Stein

This Article analyzes the probabilistic and epistemological underpinnings of the burden-of-proof doctrine. We show that this doctrine is best understood as instructing factfinders to determine which of the parties’ conflicting stories makes most sense in terms of coherence, consilience, causality, and evidential coverage. By applying this method, factfinders should try—and will often succeed—to establish the truth, rather than a statistical surrogate of the truth, while securing the appropriate allocation of the risk of error. Descriptively, we argue that this understanding of the doctrine—the “relative plausibility theory”—corresponds to our courts’ practice. Prescriptively, we argue that the relative-plausibility method is operationally superior …