The Structure of Evidence Law

2006 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 805-822 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Redmayne
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Law

scholarly journals On the Supposed Jury-Dependence of Evidence Law

2006 ◽  
Vol 155 (1) ◽  
pp. 165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Schauer
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Law

scholarly journals Grand Perspectives on Evidence Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 87 (8) ◽  
pp. 2055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger C. Park
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Law

Philosophical Foundations of Evidence Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Dahlman ◽  
Alex Stein ◽  
Giovanni Tuzet
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Theory ◽  
Common Interest ◽  
Rational Beliefs ◽  
Philosophical Foundations ◽  
Legal Evidence ◽  
The Core ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Evidence Law ◽  
Core Issues ◽  
The Bayesian Approach

Philosophical Foundations of Evidence Law presents a cross-disciplinary overview of the core issues in the theory and methodology of adjudicative evidence and factfinding, assembling the major philosophical and interdisciplinary insights that define evidence theory, as related to law, in a single book. The volume presents contemporary debates on truth, knowledge, rational beliefs, proof, argumentation, explanation, coherence, probability, economics, psychology, bias, gender, and race. It covers different theoretical approaches to legal evidence, including the Bayesian approach, scenario theory, and inference to the best explanation. The volume’s contributions come from scholars spread across three continents and twelve different countries, whose common interest is evidence theory as related to law.

Expert Evidence: Law, Practice and Probability

1992 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 392-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
BERNARD ROBERTSON ◽  
G. A. VIGNAUX
Keyword(s):  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Evidence Law

scholarly journals Questioning the Behavioral Assumption Underlying Wigmorean Absolutism in the Law of Evidentiary Privileges

2003 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J. Imwinkelried
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Privileged Communications ◽  
Primary Impact

From society’s perspective, the rules governing privileged communications such as those between a client and his or her attorney are arguably the most important doctrines in evidence law. Most evidentiary doctrines relate to the court’s institutional concerns. By way of example, the best evidence and hearsay rules are largely designed to enhance the reliability of the evidence on which the trier of fact bases his or her findings. The primary impact of these rules is on the in-court behavior of witnesses, attorneys, and judges.

Warrant, Causation, and the Atomism of Evidence Law

Episteme ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Haack
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Evidence Law ◽  
Epistemological Analysis ◽  
Causal Conclusion ◽  
Do So

ABSTRACTThe epistemological analysis offered in this paper reveals that a combination of pieces of evidence, none of them sufficient by itself to warrant a causal conclusion to the legally required degree of proof, may do so jointly. The legal analysis offered here, interlocking with this, reveals thatDaubert’s requirement that courts screen each item of scientific expert testimony for reliability can actually impede the process of arriving at the conclusion most warranted by the evidence proffered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document