Search for: "Rules of Evidence v. Rules"
Results 321 - 340
of 59,286
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Feb 2011, 1:21 pm
Like its federal counterpart, Tennessee Rule of Evidence 1002, Tennessee's Best Evidence Rule, provides that To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules... [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 4:30 am
Evidence Act) were legislated into hurried existence in the late 1960’s, in response to the decision in, Myers v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 11:56 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 9:00 am
In Pollitt Drive, LLC v. [read post]
18 May 2016, 1:30 pm
After all, we still have the rules of evidence, right? [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 10:09 am
NIMJ's web site has posted a fascinating ruling by Vice Admiral MacDonald granting a petition for new trial in United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 3:43 am
Cart Shield USA, LLC, 2013 WL 3353835 (S.D.Fla. 2013), addresses three interesting questions under Federal Rule of Evidence 609: (1) are convictions... [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 6:48 am
Like its federal counterpart, Arizona Rule of Evidence 608(b) provides that Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in Rule 609, may... [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 4:50 pm
But I fear that the Alaska Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mueller v. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 4:50 pm
But I fear that the Alaska Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mueller v. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 6:07 pm
By Miriam Swedlow Despite overruling the Federal Circuit’s prior practice of reviewing all aspects of patent claim construction de novo, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 10:40 am
Such evidence is not barred by the collateral source rule. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 4:00 am
The three accused men in R. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2022, 3:00 am
The case is Thompson v. [read post]
13 May 2020, 2:03 am
The Supreme Court, in deciding Daubert, made clear that the question whether an expert witness’s opinion was admissible was governed under the procedure set out in Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a).[2] The significance of placing the Rule 702 issues under the procedures set out in Rule 104(a) is that the trial judge must make the admissibility determination, and that he or she is not bound by the rules of evidence. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 11:28 am
Oct. 20, 2016) (en banc) in which it considered, sitting en banc, whether to adopt Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to govern the admissibility of expert evidence. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 11:28 am
Oct. 20, 2016) (en banc) in which it considered, sitting en banc, whether to adopt Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to govern the admissibility of expert evidence. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 8:31 am
In last week’s case (Timar v. [read post]
14 Jan 2013, 10:27 am
Bank v. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 2:13 pm
The Court ruled 6-2 in Tyson Foods v. [read post]
