Evidence Commons^™

Expert Information And Expert Evidence: A Preliminary Taxonomy, Samuel R. Gross, Jennifer L. Mnookin

Articles

Federal Rule of Evidence 702 speaks in very general terms. It governs every situation in which "scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact," and provides that, in that situation, "a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise . . . .' In 2000, following a trio of Supreme Court cases interpreting Rule 702, the Rule was amended to include a third requirement, in addition to the helpfulness of the testimony and the qualifications of the witness: reliability. Under Rule 702 …

Expert Testimony On Fingerprints: An Internet Exchange, Richard D. Friedman, David H. Kaye, Jennifer Mnookin, Dale Nance, Michael Saks

Articles

In United States v. Llera Plaza, 188 F. Supp. 2d 549 (E.D. Pa. 2002), a federal district initially limited expert opinion testimony on fingerprint identifications because the government was unable to show that such identifications were sufficiently valid and reliable under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Then, the court withdrew the opinion. This article reproduces an exchange of notes on the initial opinion submitted by five law professors.

Title Vii Quid Pro Quo And Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment Claims: Changing The Legal Framework Courts Use To Determine Whether Challenged Conduct Is Unwelcome, Elsie Mata

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In examining the nature of sexual harassment claims, the author challenges the use of the "unwelcomeness" element to distinguish actionable conduct from nonactionable conduct. The author contends that the "unwelcomeness" element demeans women in two ways: (1) it assumes the male perspective and presumes that the plaintiff appreciated the challenged conduct unless she proves otherwise; and (2) it allows the defense to engage in intrusive, irrelevant, and damaging inquiries as it attempts to refute the plaintiff's allegation that the challenged conduct was unwelcome.

The author argues for three reforms. First, courts should shift the burden of proving that the challenged …

Uniform Rules Of Evidence (1999), C. Arlen Beam, Leo H. Whinery

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mental Health Provider Privilege In The Wake Of Jaffe V. Redmond, Robert H. Aronson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Background, And Overview, C. Arlen Beam

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural Rules Governing The Admissibility Of Evidence, Reagan Wm. Simpson, Warren S. Huang

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Presumptions And Their Effect, Leo H. Whinery

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Gladiators Go High Tech With Records--Will The Feds Follow?, Daniel R. Murray, Timothy J. Chorvat

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Testimony To Accommodate The Frye, Daubert, And Kumho Tire Standards Of Admissibility, Rhoda B. Billings

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding The Proper Balance In Hearsay Policy: The Uniform Rules Attempt To Stem The Hearsay Tide In Criminal Cases Without Prohibiting All Nontraditional Hearsay, Myrna S. Raeder

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Rules Of Evidence: Raising The Bar On Adminissibility Of Expert Testimony: Can Your Expert Make The Grade After Kumho Tire V. Carmichael, Douglas B. Maddock Jr.

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prejudice To The NTh Degree: The Introduction Of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against A Co-Defendant At A Megatrial, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Whether The Federal Rules Of Evidence Should Be Conceived As A Perpetual Index Code: Blindness Is Worse Than Myopia, Edward J. Imwinkelried

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Elusive Identity Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Glen Weissenberger

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidence Myopia: The Failure To See The Federal Rules Of Evidence As A Codification Of The Common Law, Glen Weissenberger

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …

Interpretation Of The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—What Happened To The Common Law?, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Kentucky Rules of Evidence, which became effective on July 1, 1992, dramatically transformed the method by which lawyers and judges address evidence issues. Before the adoption of the Rules, the law of evidence consisted mostly of a vast collection of common law rulings, accumulated over two centuries and inaccessible to lawyers and judges for all practical purposes. In addressing an evidence issue, participants had to first deal with the problem of "finding" the law-distilling from a morass of conflicting common law precedents the ones applicable to the issue at hand, a task regularly producing contention rather than agreement and, …

Iola And Daubert, Leon D. Lazer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Apology Excepted: Incorporating A Feminist Analysis Into Evidence Policy Where You Would Least Expect It, Aviva A. Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Character Evidence Prohibition: Foundations Of The Rule Against Trial By Character, David P. Leonard

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Make-Believe: The Rules Excluding Evidence Of Character And Liability Insurance (Symposium: Truth And Its Rivals: Evidence Reform And The Goals Of Evidence Law), Samuel R. Gross

Articles

Article IV of the Federal Rules of Evidence includes several rules that prohibit the use of specified types of information as evidence of particular propositions. Subsequent remedial measures are inadmissible to prove negligence (but admissible to show ownership, control, et cetera),' settlement offers are inadmissible to prove liability (but admissible to show bias or prejudice, or for other purposes),2 and so forth. Any exclusion of relevant evidence involves some distortion of reality in the sense that the picture presented to the trier of fact includes less information than the available total. That will be true whether the evidence is kept …

Expert Witnesses Under Rules 703 And 803(4) Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence: Separating The Wheat From The Chaff, L. Timothy Perrin

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike

LLM Theses and Essays

Many jurisdictions have detailed rules of evidence which regulate the facts that are admissible in court. The hearsay rule is one such rule which excludes certain evidence. The hearsay rule has roots in an old common law principle and is featured in many jurisdictions today, but has endured heavy criticisms over time. This paper examines the application of the hearsay rule in the United States and in Nigeria. Both are common law countries, however, the United States’ legal system is more advanced than that of Nigeria. This comparison aims to inform and assist current reform efforts in Nigeria.

Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

You may know the standard illustration of chutzpa - the man who kills both his parents and then begs the sentencing court to have mercy on an orphan. In this article, I discuss a case of chutzpa that is nearly as outlandish - the criminal defendant who, having rendered his victim unavailable to testify, contends that evidence of the victim's statement should not be admitted against him because to do so would violate his right to confront her. I contend that in a case like this the defendant should be deemed to have forfeited the confrontation right. On the same …

Crime, Politics, And Race (Symposium: Justice And The Criminal Justice Process), Samuel R. Gross

Articles

The biggest problem with the criminal justice system is that too many crimes are committed-too many rapes, too many murders, too many robberies; too much violence that inflicts an untold amount of suffering and destruction on too many people. If that seems obvious, what follows should be equally obvious. The most important step to take to solve the problems of the criminal justice system is to reduce the number of crimes that are committed: to prevent crimes. The best thing we can do to help the victims of crime is to keep them from becoming victims in the first place. …

The In/Into Controversy: Lubet Misses The Point, J. Alexander Tanford

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Text, Texts, Or Ad Hoc Determinations: Interpretation Of The Federal Rules Of Evidence, Randolph N. Jonakait

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rule 701: Opinion Testimony By Lay Witnesses

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Four Greatest Myths About Summary Judgment, James Joseph Duane

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.