Add to ORKGthe Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United States\u27s decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Kumho Tire Co v. Carmichael. Judges are unsuited to the task of evaluating scientific inquiry and should refrain from trying to do so. When evaluating the admissibility of evidence, the courts should use a logical relevance test
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
This paper will discuss and analyze the problem of scientific evidence and expert testimony from Fry...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...
the Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United St...
Conflicts of interest have significant implications for the reliability of scientific expert testimo...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court replaced the general acce...
In what he describes as a premortem on Joiner v. General Electric Co., a case before the Supreme C...
In Daubert, the Supreme Court opined that opposing expert testimony is an effective safeguard agains...
federal judges were directed to examine the scientific method underlying expert evidence and admit t...
This Article begins with a brief exploration of the philosophy of science that is laid out in the Da...
This article argues that many judges lack the capacity to distinguish between experts witnesses who ...
Read court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that expert...
In its landmark decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Supreme Court announce...
In Crawford v Washington, the Supreme Court substantially changed its understanding of how the Confr...
Although the Supreme Court elaborated a standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in Dauber...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
This paper will discuss and analyze the problem of scientific evidence and expert testimony from Fry...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...
the Article argues in support of Professor Crump\u27s critique of the Supreme Court of the United St...
Conflicts of interest have significant implications for the reliability of scientific expert testimo...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court replaced the general acce...
In what he describes as a premortem on Joiner v. General Electric Co., a case before the Supreme C...
In Daubert, the Supreme Court opined that opposing expert testimony is an effective safeguard agains...
federal judges were directed to examine the scientific method underlying expert evidence and admit t...
This Article begins with a brief exploration of the philosophy of science that is laid out in the Da...
This article argues that many judges lack the capacity to distinguish between experts witnesses who ...
Read court decisions and commentaries from 100, or evenfive years ago, and you will find that expert...
In its landmark decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Supreme Court announce...
In Crawford v Washington, the Supreme Court substantially changed its understanding of how the Confr...
Although the Supreme Court elaborated a standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in Dauber...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
This paper will discuss and analyze the problem of scientific evidence and expert testimony from Fry...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...