Evidence Commons^™

Congressional Discretion In Dealing With The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Stuart M. Lockman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

On November 20, 1972, the Supreme Court, pursuant to statutory authority, adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence. The new rules of evidence were not to take effect, however, until ninety days after they had been submitted to Congress. The rules were officially submitted on February 5, 1973, but even before that date they had become the subject of extensive legislative debate. While some attorneys praise the codification of evidence rules as a progressive step, others maintain that certain of these promulgations will have an objectionable impact on the federal judicial system or that the Supreme Court has exceeded its authority …

Former-Testimony Exception In The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence, The , Michael M. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

According to one member of the Advisory Committee which drafted them, the proposed Rules of Evidence for the United States Courts and Magistrates were promulgated to "improve the truth-finding capacity of the courts," as well as to provide the benefits of simplification and uniformity. In much the same way that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have led to modernization of procedural rules in many states, the proposed Federal Rules of Evidence may be the vehicle by which improvements unsuccessfully codified in the Model Code of Evidence and the Uniform Rules of Evidence can finally be achieved across the United …

Basic Rules Of Relevancy In The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence, Jack B. Weinstein, Margaret A. Berger

Georgia Law Review

IN evaluating the proposed Rules of Evidence for the United States Federal District Courts and Magistrates now being considered by the bench and bar, there are a number of pervasive issues in addition to specific policy and drafting decisions reflected in individual rules. Among them are: First, the question whether federal rules of evidence are desirable; second, the degree of discretion to be afforded trial judges in applying the rules; third, the relation of state to federal rules; and, fourth, the question whether distinctions should be drawn between civil and criminal cases and between bench and jury-tried cases.

Highlights Of The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence, Thomas F. Green, Jr.

Georgia Law Review

THE first reasoned analysis of the law of evidence is attributed by Wigmore to Evans' 1806 Notes to Pothier on Obligations.' This drew attention to the reasons for evidentiary rules and to the existence of a set of principles underlying them. Later Bentham's writings emphasized needed changes.Some years thereafter an able Georgia judge criticized certain aspects of evidence law. Joseph Henry Lump- kin said: "I have long been satisfied that we are too hide-bound and restricted in our practice, with regard to the admissibility of evidence." In a later opinion he added:

Truth, common sense, and enlightened reason, alike demand …