Add to ORKGRead court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that experts and scientific evidence were causing problems then just as they are causing problems now. I do not think that Daubert, Kumho Tire, or any change in a rule of evidence will keep expert scientific testimony from being a difficult area for the legal system. Yet we must still ask: What are the best terms on which to deal with scientific experts, and how can weimprove the system
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
the Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United St...
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory r...
Read court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that expert...
When evidence with a scientific basis is offered, two fundamental questions arise. First, should it ...
A recent report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology questioned the vali...
Part I documents how courts have failed to faithfully apply Daubert’s criteria for scientific validi...
For almost three-quarters of a century, the venerable standard announced in Frye v. United States go...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Daubert clarified the standards for the admissibility of expert e...
In Daubert, the Supreme Court opined that opposing expert testimony is an effective safeguard agains...
The controversy over the proper standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence is an argument...
Although the Supreme Court elaborated a standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in Dauber...
The typical requisites for receiving testimony from an expert witness are that the expert be qualifi...
The trial of Robert E. Chambers, Jr., for the murder of eighteen year old Jennifer Levin in Central ...
This essay is a response to Professor Edward Imwinkelried\u27s article, Should the Courts Incorpora...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
the Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United St...
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory r...
Read court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that expert...
When evidence with a scientific basis is offered, two fundamental questions arise. First, should it ...
A recent report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology questioned the vali...
Part I documents how courts have failed to faithfully apply Daubert’s criteria for scientific validi...
For almost three-quarters of a century, the venerable standard announced in Frye v. United States go...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Daubert clarified the standards for the admissibility of expert e...
In Daubert, the Supreme Court opined that opposing expert testimony is an effective safeguard agains...
The controversy over the proper standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence is an argument...
Although the Supreme Court elaborated a standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in Dauber...
The typical requisites for receiving testimony from an expert witness are that the expert be qualifi...
The trial of Robert E. Chambers, Jr., for the murder of eighteen year old Jennifer Levin in Central ...
This essay is a response to Professor Edward Imwinkelried\u27s article, Should the Courts Incorpora...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
the Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United St...
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory r...