Search for: "Kumho"
Results 1 - 20
of 151
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2024, 8:22 am
Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997); Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 3:11 pm
Courts also have mistaken assumptions about the field of musicology; abdicate their duties under Daubert/Kumho Tire. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 7:53 am
” Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:04 pm
Four Supreme Court cases (Daubert, Joiner, Kumho Tire, and Weisgram), and a major revision in Rule 702, ratified by Congress, all embraced the importance of judicial gatekeeping of expert witness opinion testimony to the fact-finding function of trials. [read post]
25 Aug 2022, 1:35 pm
Contra Kumho Tire To get to his conclusion, Gelbach attempts to remove the constraints of traditional standards of significance probability. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 8:17 am
Graham, “The Expert Witness, Predicament: Determining ‘Reliable’ Under the Gatekeeping Test of Daubert, Kumho, and Proposed Amended Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence,” 54 U. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 3:25 pm
Two years later, the Supreme Court held in Kumho Tire v. [read post]
20 May 2021, 7:59 am
See, Kumho Tire v. [read post]
6 Sep 2020, 12:28 pm
” In fact, Judge Bennett goes so far as to emphasize that this core reliability finding is arguably more important when dealing with cop experts, such as this case: “Daubert and Kumho Tire may be harder to apply when the expert testimony is ‘experience-based’ rather than ‘science-based. [read post]
1 Sep 2020, 11:33 am
Cir. 1999) (“While ‘[w]idespread acceptance can be an important factor’ in an assessment of reliability … after Daubert and Kumho [Tire], the inquiry does not necessarily end there. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 11:18 am
Daubert itself was a pharmaceutical product liability case, as were Joiner and Kumho Tire. [read post]
11 May 2020, 1:09 am
In the words of Judge Jed Rakoff, who served on the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,[5] addressed the limited ability of cross-examination in the context of forensic evidence: “Although effective cross-examination may mitigate some of these dangers, the explicit premise of Daubert and Kumho Tire is that, when it comes to expert testimony, cross-examination is inherently handicapped by the jury’s own lack of background knowledge, so that the Court… [read post]
8 May 2020, 3:47 am
Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997); Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 2:25 pm
[xi] Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 7:39 am
This was expanded by the Supreme Court in Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 7:39 am
This was expanded by the Supreme Court in Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 7:39 am
This was expanded by the Supreme Court in Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 7:39 am
This was expanded by the Supreme Court in Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 10:44 am
Imwinkelried, the Taxonomy of Testimony Post-Kumho: Refocusing on the Bottom Lines of Reliability and Necessity,” 30 Cumberland L. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 10:59 am
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Daubert is now over 25 years old. [read post]
