Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice
Appraising the worth of others’ testimony is always complex; appraising the worth of expert testimony is even harder; appraising the worth of expert testimony in a legal context is harder yet. Legal efforts to assess the reliability of expert testimony—I’ll focus on evolving U.S. law governing the a...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura Jurídica
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Quaestio Facti |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22312 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849702230162145280 |
|---|---|
| author | Susan Haack |
| author_facet | Susan Haack |
| author_sort | Susan Haack |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Appraising the worth of others’ testimony is always complex; appraising the worth of expert testimony is even harder; appraising the worth of expert testimony in a legal context is harder yet. Legal efforts to assess the reliability of expert testimony—I’ll focus on evolving U.S. law governing the admissibility of such testimony—seem far from adequate, offering little effective practical guidance. My purpose in this paper is to think through what might be done to offer courts more real, operational help. The first step is to explain why the legal formulae that have evolved over the years may seem reassuring, but aren’t really of much practical use. The next is to suggest that we might do better not by amending evidentiary rules but by helping judges and attorneys understand what questions they should ask about expert evidence. I focus here on (i) epidemiological testimony, and (ii) the process of peer review. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-29d37eb4ec634e32b862a601bc753b1b |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2660-4515 2604-6202 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | Universitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura Jurídica |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Quaestio Facti |
| spelling | doaj-art-29d37eb4ec634e32b862a601bc753b1b2025-08-20T03:17:43ZengUniversitat de Girona. Cátedra de Cultura JurídicaQuaestio Facti2660-45152604-62022020-01-01110.33115/udg_bib/qf.i0.2231222290Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical AdviceSusan Haack0University of MiamiAppraising the worth of others’ testimony is always complex; appraising the worth of expert testimony is even harder; appraising the worth of expert testimony in a legal context is harder yet. Legal efforts to assess the reliability of expert testimony—I’ll focus on evolving U.S. law governing the admissibility of such testimony—seem far from adequate, offering little effective practical guidance. My purpose in this paper is to think through what might be done to offer courts more real, operational help. The first step is to explain why the legal formulae that have evolved over the years may seem reassuring, but aren’t really of much practical use. The next is to suggest that we might do better not by amending evidentiary rules but by helping judges and attorneys understand what questions they should ask about expert evidence. I focus here on (i) epidemiological testimony, and (ii) the process of peer review.https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22312evidence lawexpert testimonyreliabilityepidemiologypeer reviewthe Daubert-Joiner-Kumbo régime |
| spellingShingle | Susan Haack Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice Quaestio Facti evidence law expert testimony reliability epidemiology peer review the Daubert-Joiner-Kumbo régime |
| title | Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice |
| title_full | Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice |
| title_fullStr | Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice |
| title_full_unstemmed | Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice |
| title_short | Judging Expert Testimony: From Verbal Formalism to Practical Advice |
| title_sort | judging expert testimony from verbal formalism to practical advice |
| topic | evidence law expert testimony reliability epidemiology peer review the Daubert-Joiner-Kumbo régime |
| url | https://revistes.udg.edu/quaestio-facti/article/view/22312 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT susanhaack judgingexperttestimonyfromverbalformalismtopracticaladvice |