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

Evidence Commons™

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

Discipline
Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 3421 - 3450 of 5952

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

Liability For Uncertainty: Making Evidential Damage Actionable, Alex Stein, Ariel Porat Jul 1997

Liability For Uncertainty: Making Evidential Damage Actionable, Alex Stein, Ariel Porat

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman Jul 1997

Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman

Cardozo Law Review

Lack of information distorts litigation. Claims or defenses that a party might prove easily, or that might even be undisputed, in a world of perfect information can be difficult or impossible to prove in the real world of imperfect information. Some information deficiencies are inevitable, at least in the sense that we could not eliminate them without incurring undue social costs. In some cases, however, a person's conduct may have caused the deficiency. More generally, the person may have had available a reasonable alternative course of conduct that would have eliminated, or at least mitigated, the deficiency.

Go to article

Probabilistic Networks And Inferred Causation, Christian Borgelt, Rudolf Kruse Jul 1997

Probabilistic Networks And Inferred Causation, Christian Borgelt, Rudolf Kruse

Cardozo Law Review

In this article we discuss two related subjects. In the first place, we explain in a tutorial manner the technique of reasoning in probabilistic network structures, which is based on the idea of decomposing a multi-dimensional probability distribution and drawing inferences using only the parts of the decomposition. Secondly, we consider the relations between the structure of a multi-dimensional probability distribution and the underlying causal structure and examine an algorithm which tries to infer the causal structure from the probabilistic structure.

Go to article

After The Dna Wars: Skirmishing With Nrc Ii, Richard O. Lempert Jul 1997

After The Dna Wars: Skirmishing With Nrc Ii, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

This article traces some of the controversies surrounding DNA evidence and argues that although many have been laid to rest by scientific developments confirmed in the National Research Council's second DNA report, there remain several problems which are likely to lead to continued questioning of standard ways prosecutors present DNA evidence. Although much about the report is to be commended, it falls short in several ways, the most important of which is in its support for presenting random match probabilities independent of plausible error rates. The article argues that although one can sympathize with the NRC committee's decision as an …

Go to article

The Supreme Court's Decision To Recognize A Psychotherapist Privilege In Jaffee V. Redmond, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996): The Meaning Of The Term 'Experience' And The Role Of 'Reason' Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 501, Diane Marie Amann, Edward J. Imwinkelried Jul 1997

The Supreme Court's Decision To Recognize A Psychotherapist Privilege In Jaffee V. Redmond, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996): The Meaning Of The Term 'Experience' And The Role Of 'Reason' Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 501, Diane Marie Amann, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Scholarly Works

In Jaffee v. United States, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996), the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a testimonial privilege protecting the patient-psychotherapist relationship. Its decision is based on Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which permits courts to decide novel questions of privilege in the light of reason and experience. The Court held that this rule authorized not only recognition of a new privilege, but also a privilege of a broad scope, extending to relationships between patients and licensed clinical social workers. Its decision came as a mild surprise, given a widely shared assumption that Rule 501 creates a …

Go to article

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors Paul F. Rothstein, Et. Al., Office Of The President V. Office Of Independent Counsel, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Allen, Margaret A. Berger, William J. Bridge, Paul C. Giannelli, Stephen Gillers, Laird C. Kirkpatrick, David P. Leonard, Miguel A. Mendez, Roger C. Park, Myrna S. Raeder, John W. Reed, Mark Reutlinger, Leo M. Romero, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Peter Tillers Jun 1997

On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Brief Of Law Professors Paul F. Rothstein, Et. Al., Office Of The President V. Office Of Independent Counsel, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Allen, Margaret A. Berger, William J. Bridge, Paul C. Giannelli, Stephen Gillers, Laird C. Kirkpatrick, David P. Leonard, Miguel A. Mendez, Roger C. Park, Myrna S. Raeder, John W. Reed, Mark Reutlinger, Leo M. Romero, Stephen A. Saltzburg, Peter Tillers

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

This Court should grant review not only because this is a case of national importance and prominence, but also because the decision below is a conspicuous departure from settled principles of evidence law. The panel majority concluded that communications between government lawyers and government officials are not protected by the attorney-client privilege, at least when those communications are sought by a federal grand jury. That conclusion conflicts with the predominant common-law understanding that the attorney-client privilege applies to government entities and that where the privilege applies, it is absolute (i.e., it protects against disclosure in all types of legal and …

Go to article

Prior Bad Acts And Two Bad Rules: The Fundamental Unfairness Of Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414, Jason L. Mccandless May 1997

Prior Bad Acts And Two Bad Rules: The Fundamental Unfairness Of Federal Rules Of Evidence 413 And 414, Jason L. Mccandless

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This note presents a Due Process analysis of Federal Rules of Evidence 413 and 414. These rules, which took effect in July 1995, overturn the exclusionary requirements of Rule 404 exclusively in cases involving sexual assault and child molestation. The new rules allow similar crimes to serve as evidence for purposes other than those stated in Rule 404(b). Now, federal prosecutors may offer evidence of a defendant's prior uncharged sexual misconduct to demonstrate that the defendant committed the sex offense for which he currently is being charged. Rules 413 and 414 reevaluate the historic concern that evidence of prior acts …

Go to article

Glide Path To An "Inclusionary Rule": How Expansion Of The Good Faith Exception Threatens To Fundamentally Change The Exclusionary Rule, James P. Fleissner May 1997

Glide Path To An "Inclusionary Rule": How Expansion Of The Good Faith Exception Threatens To Fundamentally Change The Exclusionary Rule, James P. Fleissner

Mercer Law Review

During recent political debates over the federal budget deficit, it became fashionable to speak of a "glide path" to a balanced budget. Advocates of a budget plan would plan certain tax rates and spending limits, factor in a set of economic assumptions, and graph a swooping path of declining deficits over several years. Needless to say, that sort of exercise in prediction does not involve the sort of odds that would inspire confidence in a gambler. The accuracy of the beguiling graph, of course, depends on whether tax and spending commitments are kept and whether a host of economic assumptions …

Go to article

A Misapplication Of Daubert: Compton V. Subaru Of America Opens The Gate For Unreliable And Irrelevant Expert Testimony, Jonathan R. Schofield May 1997

A Misapplication Of Daubert: Compton V. Subaru Of America Opens The Gate For Unreliable And Irrelevant Expert Testimony, Jonathan R. Schofield

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Oregon Trial Practice, Oregon Law Institute, William Gaylord, Robert A. Shlachter, Janet Lee Hoffman, Robert J. Neuberger, Billy M. Sime, Gregory R. Mowe, David B. Markowitz, Bruce C. Hamlin Apr 1997

Oregon Trial Practice, Oregon Law Institute, William Gaylord, Robert A. Shlachter, Janet Lee Hoffman, Robert J. Neuberger, Billy M. Sime, Gregory R. Mowe, David B. Markowitz, Bruce C. Hamlin

Oregon Law Institute, 1997

Course Materials from the April 11, 1997 Program in Portland

Go to article

Civilians Don't Try: A Comment On Mirjan Dama~Ka's "Rational And Irrational Proof Revisited", William Twining Apr 1997

Civilians Don't Try: A Comment On Mirjan Dama~Ka's "Rational And Irrational Proof Revisited", William Twining

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article explores the cultural differences between common law and civil law systems, particularly in how they approach trials and evidence. It highlights that common law systems, like the American model, emphasize adversarial trials and public spectacle, while civil law systems focus on written records and bureaucratic processes. The O.J. Simpson trial serves as a prime example of these differences, showcasing the dramatic and media-driven nature of American trials compared to the more subdued European approach.

Go to article

The American Adversarial System In Criminal Cases: Between Ideology And Reality, Johannes F. Nijboer Apr 1997

The American Adversarial System In Criminal Cases: Between Ideology And Reality, Johannes F. Nijboer

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article critically examines the adversarial system in American criminal cases, contrasting it with the inquisitorial system prevalent in many European countries. It argues that while the adversarial system remains a defining feature of U.S. criminal procedure, the inquisitorial system, as a historical concept, no longer exists in its traditional form. The analysis emphasizes the need for nuanced comparative legal scholarship to avoid oversimplification and highlights the cultural and historical contexts shaping these procedural systems.

Go to article

The Susceptibility Of Formal Models Of Evidentiary Inference To Cultural Sensitivity, Ron A. Shapira Apr 1997

The Susceptibility Of Formal Models Of Evidentiary Inference To Cultural Sensitivity, Ron A. Shapira

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines whether formal models of evidentiary inference, specifically probabilistic (Pascalian) and inductive (Baconian) models, can accommodate cultural sensitivity. It argues that both models fail to adequately address cultural factors, which significantly influence evidentiary judgments. The probabilistic model overlooks the cultural context in sample space selection, while the inductive model, though rooted in a socially sensitive philosophy of science, does not explicitly incorporate cultural influences. This omission leads to potential biases and inaccuracies in legal proceedings.

Go to article

Posado And The Polygraph: The Truth Behind Post-Daubert Deception Detection, Jeffrey Philip Ouellet Mar 1997

Posado And The Polygraph: The Truth Behind Post-Daubert Deception Detection, Jeffrey Philip Ouellet

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

House Rules: Is A Supermajority Requirement For Tax Hikes Constitutional?, John O. Mcginnis, Michael B. Rappaport, Susan Low Bloch Mar 1997

House Rules: Is A Supermajority Requirement For Tax Hikes Constitutional?, John O. Mcginnis, Michael B. Rappaport, Susan Low Bloch

Articles

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Rape Trauma Syndrome, Paul C. Giannelli Feb 1997

Rape Trauma Syndrome, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

Article discusses use of rape trauma syndrom in litigation.

Go to article

Is The Witness Believable? A New Look At Truth And Veracity Character Evidence And Bad Acts Relevant To Truthfulness In A Criminal Case, Fred W. Bennett Jan 1997

Is The Witness Believable? A New Look At Truth And Veracity Character Evidence And Bad Acts Relevant To Truthfulness In A Criminal Case, Fred W. Bennett

St. Thomas Law Review

This article explores the evidentiary use at trial of a witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.' Additionally, the article discusses Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule or Rules) 404(a)(1), 405(a), 608(a), and 608(b). Part II of this article covers the common law antecedents of the rules governing the use of truth and veracity character evidence. Part III explores the rationale and scope of Rule 404(a)(1), with illustrations of the use of opinion and reputation evidence under this rule. This section also includes a discussion of Rule 405(a), with an illustration of cross-examination under this rule. Part IV covers Rule 608(a) along …

Go to article

Spoliation Of Evidence In Illinois: The Law After Boyd V. Traveler's Insurance Co., Margaret O'Mara Frossard Hon., Neal S. Gainsberg Jan 1997

Spoliation Of Evidence In Illinois: The Law After Boyd V. Traveler's Insurance Co., Margaret O'Mara Frossard Hon., Neal S. Gainsberg

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Between Rock And A Hard Place: The Right To Testify And Impeachment By Prior Conviction, Alan D. Hornstein Jan 1997

Between Rock And A Hard Place: The Right To Testify And Impeachment By Prior Conviction, Alan D. Hornstein

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Hearsay Evidence: A Comparison Of Two Jurisdictions: United States And Nigeria, Lawrence Okechukwu Azubuike Jan 1997

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.

Go to article

The Proper Test For Assessing The Admissibility Of Nonscientific Expert Evidence Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 702, 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence , Peter B. Oh Jan 1997

The Proper Test For Assessing The Admissibility Of Nonscientific Expert Evidence Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 702, 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence , Peter B. Oh

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts have fashioned various common law standards to determine the admissibility of nonscientific expert evidence. This Article examines these different standards to evince the need for harmony. Part I of this article examines the admissibility tests for nonscientific expert evidence administered by federal courts before Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The first such test appears in Frye v. United States, which establishes only expert knowledge based on a method or principle that has gained sufficient "general acceptance" can be admitted. Part I concludes by discussing the problems that plague these different applied tests and beckon for a single standard. Part …

Go to article

The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed Jan 1997

The Character Evidence Defense: Acquittal Based On Good Character, Thomas J. Reed

Cleveland State Law Review

This article centers on the case of United States v. Martinez, the only recent case in which an accused was acquitted on the ground of good moral character. Martinez illustrates the powerful effect of a good character evidence defense that showed the accused led a blameless life before being inveigled into drug courier service by an intimidating DEA informer. This article begins with a brief review of United States v. Martinez. Following a presentation of this case, the article shifts focus to examine what our sister discipline of psychology can tell us about human personality and the cross-situational stability of …

Go to article

Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege: A Rational Approach To Defining Psychotherapist, The 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence, Kathleen M. Maynard Jan 1997

Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege: A Rational Approach To Defining Psychotherapist, The 1997 John M. Manos Writing Competition On Evidence, Kathleen M. Maynard

Cleveland State Law Review

In the recently decided case of Jaffee v. Redmond, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged the existence of a psychotherapist-patient privilege under Federal Rule of Evidence 501 for the first time. This Article will make recommendations to lower federal courts that must construe the meaning of "psychotherapist." Part II will provide an overview of federal psychotherapist-patient privilege law prior to Jaffee. Part III will discuss the Court's decision to expand the definition of "psychotherapist" based upon the increased demand for therapy among lower income Americans. Part IV will make three arguments explaining why lower federal courts are free to extend …

Go to article

Linking Genes With Behavior: The Social And Legal Implications Of Using Genetic Evidence In Criminal Trials, Carol A. Gaudet Jan 1997

Linking Genes With Behavior: The Social And Legal Implications Of Using Genetic Evidence In Criminal Trials, Carol A. Gaudet

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note surveys the increasingly problematic issue of using genetic information in legal decision making. This Note concludes that genetic evidence should be admissible during both the guilt or innocence phases and the penalty phases of criminal trials because it improves the trial process by enhancing juries' understanding of the defendant's intentions during the commission of their crimes.

Go to article

Felton V. Felton: A Case Study , James Wilsman Jan 1997

Felton V. Felton: A Case Study , James Wilsman

Cleveland State Law Review

The Felton decision ends years of conflict among Ohio's Appellate Districts as to whether or not the higher burden of proof of "clear and convincing evidence" is required in domestic violence cases. This article discusses the issue of whether the court inadvertently violated the constitutional rights of those individuals accused of committing acts of domestic violence. The author suggests that by abrogating the need for corroborating evidence, the Court has, in effect, made it difficult for those individuals who are innocent from protecting themselves against false allegations. Part II discusses the Felton case, while Part III briefly walks through the …

Go to article

Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1997

Towards A (Bayesian) Convergence?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

If I understand them correctly, several leading Bayesioskeptics (Allen, Callen, Stein) acknowledge - with varying degrees of specificity and varying degrees of grudgingness - that standard probability theory can be useful as an analytical tool in considering evidentiary doctrines and the probative value of evidentiary items.

Go to article

Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1997

Answering The Bayesioskeptical Challenge, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In recent years, some scholars of evidence, myself among them, have made active use of subjective probability theory - what is sometimes referred to as Bayesianism - in thinking about issues and problems related to the law of evidence. But, at the same time, this use has been challenged to various degrees and in various ways by scholars to whom I shall apply the collective, if somewhat misleading, label of Bayesioskeptics. I present this brief paper to defend this use of probability theory, and to discuss what I believe is its proper role in discourse about evidentiary issues.

Go to article

Confrontation And The Definition Of Chutzpa, Richard D. Friedman Jan 1997

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 …

Go to article

On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley Jan 1997

On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley

Scholarly Works

As a general rule, extrinsic evidence, whether written or oral, is not admissible to prove either the intent of the parties to a contract or the meaning of contractual terms when the parties have executed an unambiguous, fully-integrated (i.e., final and all-inclusive) written agreement. The trial court may consider various types of extrinsic evidence, however, in determining whether a particular agreement is fully integrated or ambiguous, and even in choosing among rival interpretations of an agreement where ambiguity is not present. If the trial court determines that an agreement is not fully integrated, then the trier of fact may consider …

Go to article

Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber Jan 1997

Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber

Publications

No abstract provided.

Go to article

First Prev Next Last