Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (60)
- Criminal Procedure (41)
- Jurisprudence (40)
- Criminal Law (39)
- Judges (37)
-
- Legal History (23)
- Evidence (19)
- International Law (18)
- Legislation (17)
- Jurisdiction (14)
- Law and Society (14)
- Human Rights Law (11)
- Torts (10)
- Bankruptcy Law (8)
- First Amendment (8)
- Law and Politics (8)
- Legal Profession (8)
- Science and Technology Law (8)
- Administrative Law (7)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (7)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (7)
- Contracts (7)
- Environmental Law (7)
- Intellectual Property Law (7)
- Supreme Court of the United States (7)
- Banking and Finance Law (6)
- Education Law (5)
- Labor and Employment Law (5)
- Keyword
-
- Courts (96)
- Constitutional Law (25)
- Judges (25)
- Legal Practice and Procedure (21)
- Politics (General) (16)
-
- Jurisprudence (13)
- Evidence (12)
- Federal Courts (11)
- Legal History (11)
- Supreme Court of the United States (11)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (9)
- Parents and Children (8)
- Business and the Law (7)
- Judiciary Branch (7)
- Jurisdiction (7)
- Legislation (7)
- Science and Technology Law (7)
- Robert H. Bork (6)
- Statutory Interpretation (6)
- Biography (5)
- Civil Rights (5)
- Constitutional Courts (5)
- Property--Personal and Real (5)
- Banking and Finance Law (4)
- Contracts (4)
- Domestic Relations (4)
- Environmental Law (4)
- First Amendment (4)
- Intellectual Property Law (4)
- Law Enforcement (4)
Articles 151 - 180 of 221
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Check Your Crystal Ball At The Courthouse Door, Please: Exploring The Past, Understanding The Present, And Worrying About The Future Of Scientific Evidence, David L. Faigman, Elise Porter, Michael J. Saks
Check Your Crystal Ball At The Courthouse Door, Please: Exploring The Past, Understanding The Present, And Worrying About The Future Of Scientific Evidence, David L. Faigman, Elise Porter, Michael J. Saks
Cardozo Law Review
Since the earliest days of the use of expert witnesses, judges (and more recently legislatures) have struggled to design the juridical intersection where law and science cross paths. The effort has not met with notable success. This situation could be changing, however. Last term, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Supreme Court adopted a novel approach to the age-old problem of scientific evidence. The -Court determined that the Federal Rules of Evidence require scientific evidence to be scientifically valid before it enters the courtroom. The Court has served notice that experts should trade in their crystal balls …
The Meaning Of Daubert And What That Means For Forensic Science, Randolph N. Jonakait
The Meaning Of Daubert And What That Means For Forensic Science, Randolph N. Jonakait
Cardozo Law Review
Daubert's effect on forensic science is unclear because the opinion is unclear. The Daubert Court did start blazing a useful path by stating that before scientific testimony is admitted, the trial court must be convinced that "the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid and ... that [the] reasoning or methodology properly can be applied to the facts in issue." But the Court's trailblazing was incomplete and often misleading.
The Supreme Court’S View Of Science: Has Daubert Exorcised The Certainty Demon?, Bert Black
The Supreme Court’S View Of Science: Has Daubert Exorcised The Certainty Demon?, Bert Black
Cardozo Law Review
The Supreme Court's mandate in Daubert that experts who give testimony based on science must confine themselves to valid scientific knowledge seems tautologically obvious, and hardly an issue requiring the attention of the nation's nine highest judges. The debate that led to Daubert was generated, however, by opponents of judicial screening who argued that holding experts to scientific standards somehow imposes an undue burden of proof on plaintiffs, especially in toxic tort cases - and the Supreme Court's decision has not put the issue completely to rest. Science, according to this "relaxed standards" argument, demands certainty far beyond the law's …
On The Relevance Of The Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence: Tort System Outcomes Are Principally Determined By Lawyers’ Rates Of Return, Lester Brickman
On The Relevance Of The Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence: Tort System Outcomes Are Principally Determined By Lawyers’ Rates Of Return, Lester Brickman
Cardozo Law Review
The attention generated by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reflects the perceived importance of the issue of the admissibility of scientific evidence in tort litigation. In products liability litigation, whether claimants prevail often depends upon expert testimony presented on the issue of causation. Unless a claimant is able to have the expert's testimony admitted, there will be little or no chance of prevailing. Thus, though it is disputed whether Daubert will extend or contract tort liability, it is undisputed that its importance lies in its impact on the scope of tort liability.
Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Epistemiology And Legal Process, Margaret G. Farrell
Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Epistemiology And Legal Process, Margaret G. Farrell
Cardozo Law Review
Justice Blackmun's majority opinion in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. acknowledges that law and science have different goals, but it fails to recognize the implications of those differences for legal process. Recent increases in the scientifically-based claims brought in the federal courts, and in the size and complexity of the litigation in which such claims are made, have raised the stakes in the debate. At the same time, scientific concepts of relativity, uncertainty, and multiple causation are at odds with simple, legal notions about fact-finding and cause and effect. This disparity between legal and scientific understandings over the admission …
Judicial Opinions As Binding Law And As Explanations For Judgments, Thomas W. Merrill
Judicial Opinions As Binding Law And As Explanations For Judgments, Thomas W. Merrill
Cardozo Law Review
To what extent does the executive branch have autonomous powers of legal interpretation? The issue is often broadly framed in terms of two disparate understandings of the allocation of interpretative power: "judicial supremacy" and "departmentalism." In this paper, I shall speak of two different understandings of judicial opinions: the idea that judicial opinions (or at least the "holdings" of opinions) are legally binding on actors in the executive branch, and the idea that opinions are, from the perspective of executive actors, merely explanations for judicial judgments. I adopt this locution because it focuses more precisely on the core of the …
Presidential Interpretation Of The Constitution, David A. Strauss
Presidential Interpretation Of The Constitution, David A. Strauss
Cardozo Law Review
May the executive branch disagree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution, and act in accordance with its own view? We tend to associate this question with a few great constitutional crises. Disputes between President Jackson and the Supreme Court over the Bank of the United States; between President Lincoln and the Court over slavery; and between President Franklin Roosevelt and the Court over New Deal legislation, all produced memorable statements by presidents claiming a broad power to act independently from the Court's decisions. The school desegregation controversy was between the Court and some state governments, not the President, …
Imposing Unified Executive Branch Statutory Interpretation, Michael Herz
Imposing Unified Executive Branch Statutory Interpretation, Michael Herz
Cardozo Law Review
Since the birth of the administrative state, the dominant legal debate about the fourth branch has concerned the powers of the other three to control it. In recent years, the particular focus has been on presidential oversight, in part as a result of the increasingly systematic efforts of every President since Richard Nixon to gain control of the federal bureaucracy. This enormous, and in general, illuminating literature has tended, I think, to overlook two aspects of the problem.
Seqra’S Too Valuable To Trash: A Reply To Stewart Sterk, Philip Weinberg
Seqra’S Too Valuable To Trash: A Reply To Stewart Sterk, Philip Weinberg
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Districting: A Second Vantage Point, Alan Gartner
Districting: A Second Vantage Point, Alan Gartner
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Constitution Outside The Courts, Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr.
The Constitution Outside The Courts, Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr.
Cardozo Law Review
The forty-fourth Cardozo Lecture, delivered in memory of Benjamin N. Cardozo at the House of the Association on December 5, 1991.
What Courts Do To Secured Creditors In Chapter 11 Cram Down, Jack Friedman
What Courts Do To Secured Creditors In Chapter 11 Cram Down, Jack Friedman
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
German Constitutional Culture In Transition, Bernhard Schlink
German Constitutional Culture In Transition, Bernhard Schlink
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Identity, George P. Fletcher
Comment, Agnes Heller
The Court’S Role In Interbranch Disputes Over Oversight Of Agency Rulemaking, John J. Gibbons
The Court’S Role In Interbranch Disputes Over Oversight Of Agency Rulemaking, John J. Gibbons
Cardozo Law Review
This paper is adapted from the Uri and Caroline Bauer Memorial Lecture delivered at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, on March 10, 1992.
Grand Jury Charges Delivered By Supreme Court Justices Riding Circuit During The 1790s, David J. Katz
Grand Jury Charges Delivered By Supreme Court Justices Riding Circuit During The 1790s, David J. Katz
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
John D. Appel, Leslie Berman
Why The “Look And Feel” Of Computer Software Should Not Receive Copyright Protection, Matthew J. Fortnow
Why The “Look And Feel” Of Computer Software Should Not Receive Copyright Protection, Matthew J. Fortnow
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Asbestos Litigation Crisis: Is There A Need For An Administrative Alternative?, Lester Brickman
The Asbestos Litigation Crisis: Is There A Need For An Administrative Alternative?, Lester Brickman
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Derrida, Law, Violence And The Paradox Of Justice, Michel Rosenfeld
Derrida, Law, Violence And The Paradox Of Justice, Michel Rosenfeld
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Stories, Forensic Science, And Improved Verdicts, Randolph N. Jonakait
Stories, Forensic Science, And Improved Verdicts, Randolph N. Jonakait
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Proving Your Case - Evidence And Procedure In Action, Christopher Finlayson
Proving Your Case - Evidence And Procedure In Action, Christopher Finlayson
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mistrial By Likelihood Ratio: Bayesian Analysis Meets The F-Word, Paul Bergman, Al Moore
Mistrial By Likelihood Ratio: Bayesian Analysis Meets The F-Word, Paul Bergman, Al Moore
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Nationwide Service Of Process In State Courts, David Carlebach
Nationwide Service Of Process In State Courts, David Carlebach
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Justice Scalia’S Textualism: The “New” New Legal Process, Nicholas S. Zeppos
Justice Scalia’S Textualism: The “New” New Legal Process, Nicholas S. Zeppos
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Tradition, Precedent, And Justice Scalia, David A. Strauss
Tradition, Precedent, And Justice Scalia, David A. Strauss
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Justice Scalia’S Jurisprudence And The Good Society: Shades Of Felix Frankfurter And The Harvard Hit Parade Of The 1950’S, Peter B. Edelman
Justice Scalia’S Jurisprudence And The Good Society: Shades Of Felix Frankfurter And The Harvard Hit Parade Of The 1950’S, Peter B. Edelman
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Textualism And Taboo: Interpretation And Deference For Justice Scalia, Michael E. Herz
Textualism And Taboo: Interpretation And Deference For Justice Scalia, Michael E. Herz
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judicial Asceticism, Larry Kramer