Evidence Commons^™

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

Articles by Maurer Faculty

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 …

Admissions Online: Statements Of A Party Opponent In The Internet Age, Dylan Charles Edwards

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Psychotherapist And The Attorney/Client Privileges As They Arise In Civil Rights Disputes, Lewis M. Wasserman

Touro Law Review

This article briefly reviews the elements of the psychotherapist-patient and attorney-client privileges and how these privileges may be waived in the context of federal civil rights litigation.

The Propriety Of Jury Questioning: A Remedy For Perceived Harmless Error, Laurie Forbes Neff

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Social Media, The Sixth Amendment, And Restyling: Recent Developments In The Federal Laws Of Evidence, Deborah Jones Merritt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Restyled Federal Rules Of Evidence, Davison M. Douglas, Sidney A. Fitzwater, Daniel J. Capra, Robert A. Hinkle, Joseph Kimble, Joan N. Ericksen, Marilyn L. Huff, Reena A. Raggi, Geraldine Soat Brown, Edward H. Cooper, Kenneth S. Broun, Harris L. Hartz, Katharine Traylor Schaffzin, Roger C. Park, Deborah J. Merritt, Andrew D. Hurwitz, W. Jeremy Counseller, Paula Hannaford-Agor

William & Mary Law Review

A lightly edited transcript of the Symposium held at the William & Mary School of Law on October 28, 2011.

Federal Discovery Stays, Gideon Mark

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In federal civil litigation, unless a discretionary stay is granted, discovery often proceeds while motions to dismiss are pending. Plaintiffs with non-meritorious cases can compel defendants to spend massively on electronic discovery before courts ever rule on such motions. Defendants who are unable or unwilling to incur the huge up-front expense of electronic discovery may be forced to settle non-meritorious claims. To address multiple electronic discovery issues, Congress amended the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 2006 and the Federal Rules of Evidence in 2008. However, the amendments failed to significantly reduce costs and failed to address the critical issue …

Impeachment Methods Illustrated: Movies, Novels, And High Profile Cases, Martin A. Schwartz, John Nicodemo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial Evidence 2011: Advocacy, Analysis, & Illustrations, Martin A. Schwartz, Deborah Jones Merritt, William G. Young

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Return Of “Voodoo Information”: A Call To Resist A Heightened Authentication Standard For Evidence Derived From Social Networking Websites, Richard Fox

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Through The Lens Of Federal Evidence Rule 403: An Examination Of Eyewitness Identification Expert Testimony Admissibility In The Federal Circuit Courts, Lauren Tallent

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

E-Discovery's Threat To Civil Litigation: Reevaluating Rule 26 For The Digital Age, Robert M. Hardaway, Dustin D. Berger, Andrea Defield

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, even though they were amended in 2006 specifically to address the costs and scale of ediscovery, not only fail to contain the cost or scope of discovery, but, in fact, encourage expensive litigation ancillary to the merits of civil litigants' cases. This Article proposes that the solution to this dilemma is to eliminate the presumption that the producing party should pay for the cost of discovery. This rule should be abandoned in favor of a rule that would equally distribute the costs of discovery between the requesting and producing parties.

Spoliation Of Electronic Evidence: Sanctions Versus Advocacy, Charles W. Adams

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Article proposes that courts should refrain from imposing adverse inference jury instructions as sanctions for the spoliation of evidence. This proposal bears some similarity to the approach taken twenty years ago by the 1993 amendments to Rule 11, which constrained courts' ability to sanction. Instead of imposing an adverse jury instruction as a sanction for spoliation of evidence, courts should allow evidence of spoliation to be admitted at trial if a reasonable jury could find that spoliation had occurred and if the spoliation was relevant to a material issue. If a court allows the introduction of evidence of spoliation …

Narrative Implications Of Evidentiary Rules, Bruce Ching

Journal Articles

Advocates are increasingly conscious of courtroom disputes as forms of story-battles, in which the parties present competing narratives. But the rules of evidence -- determining which facts can be incorporated into the presentation of the parties' stories -- can also often best be understood from a narrative point of view. This paper examines narrative features underlying evidentiary rules dealing with leading questions, "speaking objections," and hearsay.

The Amended Attorney-Client Privilege In Oklahoma: A Misstep In The Right Direction, Robert A. Brown

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Admissibility Of Electronic Evidence Under The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Jonathan D. Frieden, Leigh M. Murray

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Following the December 2006 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, much has been written about the discovery of electronically-stored information.

Rule 801(D)'S Oxymoronic 'Not Hearsay' Classification: The Untold Backstory And A Suggested Amendment, Sam Stonefield

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines Rule 801(d)’s oxymoronic treatment of admissions and prior statements as “not hearsay.” This “not hearsay” label is inaccurate – the evidence is hearsay, as defined in Rule 801(c) – and is inconsistent with the analytically important and well-established use of the term not hearsay to describe evidence that is actually not hearsay.

The Article tells the story of how the drafters of the Federal Rules of Evidence ended up with such a confused and confusing label and proposes an amendment that would classify admissions and prior statements as hearsay exceptions and place each in a new, separate, …

Waving Goodbye To Waiver? Not So Fast: Inadvertent Disclosure, Waiver Of The Attorney-Client Privilege, And Federal Rule Of Evidence 502, Elizabeth King

Campbell Law Review

Waiver of the attorney-client privilege due to inadvertent disclosure is an important issue that courts and litigants have grappled with for a long time. With electronic discovery becoming increasingly common, and with electronic privilege reviews replacing paper reviews, the issue takes on greater importance. The risk of inadvertently disclosing privileged or protected information is heightened in electronic discovery because of the very nature of electronic information. For example, although a party makes an effort to segregate and delete privileged information from a computer drive prior to producing the electronic documents to the opposing party, the deleted files may still be …

A Hedgehog On The Witness Stand-What's The Big Idea?: The Challenges Of Using Daubert To Assess Social Science And Nonscientific Testimony, Maxine D. Goodman

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Rule Of Evidence 502: Stirring The State Law Of Privilege And Professional Responsibility With A Federal Stick, Henry S. Noyes

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Matter Of Context: Social Framework Evidence In Employment Discrimination Class Actions, Melissa Hart, Paul M. Secunda

Publications

In litigation disputes over the certification of employment discrimination class actions, social scientists have come to play a central, yet controversial, role. Organizational behavioralists and social psychologists regularly testify for the plaintiffs, offering what is commonly referred to as social framework testimony. These experts explain the general social science research on the operation of stereotyping and bias in decision making and examine the challenged workplace to identify those policies and practices that research has shown will tend to increase and those that will tend to limit the likely impact of these factors. Defendants fight hard against the admission of social …

The Expanding Use Of The Res Gestae Doctrine, H. Patrick Furman, Ann England

Publications

This article provides a brief history of the doctrine of res gestae and an analysis of its current usage in both Colorado state and federal courts.

Opinion Testimony: Lay, Expert, Or Something Else?, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This article discusses opinion testimony of lay witnesses and expert witnesses. It provides an overview of lay opinion testimony and discusses the dividing line between lay and opinion testimony.

He Said, She Said: Why Pennsylvania Should Adopt Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414, Jessica D. Khan

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Procuring The Right To An Unfair Trial: Federal Rule Of Evidence 804(B)(6) And The Due Process Implications Of The Rule's Failure To Require Standards Of Reliability For Admissible Evidence, Kelly Rutan

American University Law Review

This Comment argues that though the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing allows a court to forfeit both a defendant’s right to object to the admission of hearsay statements and the right of confrontation, the current state of the law requires all out-of-court statements admitted under Rule 804(b)(6) to possess some level of reliability in order to satisfy due process. Part I of this Comment discusses the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, the courts’ treatment of this principle prior to 1997, and its codification into the Federal Rules of Evidence. Part II looks at Confrontation Clause issues unique to hearsay exceptions …

"Electronic Fingerprints": Doing Away With The Conception Of Computer-Generated Records As Hearsay, Adam Wolfson

Michigan Law Review

One night, in the hours just before daybreak, the computer servers at Acme Corporation's headquarters quietly hum in the silence of the office's darkened hallways. Suddenly, they waken to life and begin haphazardly sifting through their files. Several states away, a hacker sits in his room, searching through the mainframe via an internet connection. His attack is quick-lasting only a short five minutes-but the evidence of invasion is apparent to Acme's IT employees when they come in to work the next morning. Nearly a year later, federal prosecutors bring suit in the federal district court against the person they believe …

Taking Facts Seriously–Again, William Twining

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Lingering Questions Of A Supreme Court Decision: The Confines Of The Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege, Jennifer L. Odrobina

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court "in light of [its] reason and experience"' has recognized a psychotherapist-patient privilege. The Court has, however, left lingering questions for the lower courts to determine regarding possible exceptions to the privilege. The lower courts have used their own reason and experience to develop exceptions to the privilege. Such exceptions include the crime-fraud exception, waiver exception, and the dangerous-patient exception. Inevitably other exceptions will follow. The Supreme Court should recognize a dangerous patient exception to the psychotherapist-patient privilege to allow a psychotherapist to testify in court when there is "a serious threat of harm to the …

Standards Of Evidence In Administrative Proceedings, William H. Kuenhle

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.