You are here

Scientific Evidence

Displaying 31 - 40 of 58
Contains
Contains
Format: 2019
Greater than or equal to
September 18, 2002
Jerome P. Kassirer, Joe S. Cecil

The Supreme Court, based on three decisions over the past decade, now requires judges to examine the underlying basis of all testimony to ensure that only expert testimony supported by valid methods if inquiry is introduced as evidence in litigation. Under these standards, expert testimony in the courtroom, including medical testimony, is supposed to meet the same standards of intellectual rigor that professionals use outside the courtroom. If expert testimony does not meet this standard, the courts are expected to exclude the testimony and may dismiss the case without trial.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 6 pages
January 1, 2002
Carol L. Krafka, D. Dean P. Miletich, Joe S. Cecil, Meghan A. Dunn, Mary T. Johnson

This is an expanded version of Expert Testimony in Federal Civil Trials: A Preliminary Analysis (2000). In 1998, the Federal Judicial Center surveyed federal judges about their experiences with expert testimony in civil cases. Judges answered specific questions about their most recent relevant civil trial, as well as questions drawing on their overall experience with expert testimony in civil cases.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 24 pages
June 15, 2001
Laural L. Hooper, Joe S. Cecil, Thomas E. Willging

This report to the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management describes two different types of independent panels used in the silicone gel breast implants litigation. The use of such panels of appointed experts represents a marked departure from the traditional means of presenting and considering testimony. This report describes these expert panels in sufficient detail to permit others to understand the procedures that were used, the benefits that resulted, and the problems that arose.

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 104 pages
January 1, 2000
Bernard D. Goldstein, Mary Sue Henifin

The Reference Guide on Toxicology is published as a chapter in the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Second Edition (pp 401-437).

Downloadable file:
January 1, 2000
Howard M. Kipen, Mary Sue Henifin, Susan R. Poulter
Downloadable file:
January 1, 2000
D. Michal Freedman, Leon Gordis, Michael D. Green
Downloadable file:
January 1, 2000
David H. Kaye, George F. Sensabaugh
Downloadable file:
January 1, 2000
Fern M. Smith, Stephen G. Breyer, Margaret A. Berger, William W Schwarzer, Joe S. Cecil, David Goodstein, David H. Kaye, David A. Freedman, Daniel L. Rubinfeld, Shari Seidman Diamond, Victoria A. Lazear, Michael D. Green, D. Michal Freedman, Leon Gordis, Bernard D. Goldstein, Mary Sue Henifin, Howard M. Kipen, Susan R. Poulter, George F. Sensabaugh, Henry Petroski

A reference to assist judges in managing expert evidence in cases involving issues of science or technology.

Other editions:

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Third Edition (2011)

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, First Edition [Superseded] (1994)

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 638 pages
January 1, 2000
Carol L. Krafka, Joe S. Cecil, Mary T. Johnson

In 1998, the Federal Judicial Center surveyed federal judges about their experiences with expert testimony in civil cases. Judges answered specific questions about their most recent relevant civil trial, as well as questions drawing on their overall experience with expert testimony in civil cases. The Center conducted a similar survey of judges in 1991, shortly before the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

Downloadable file:
PDF icon Download 8 pages

Pages

Subscribe to Scientific Evidence