Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286 (2006)

Authors
David Godden
Michigan State University
Abstract
While courts depend on expert opinions in reaching sound judgments, the role of the expert witness in legal proceedings is associated with a litany of problems. Perhaps most prevalent is the question of under what circumstances should testimony be admitted as expert opinion. We review the changing policies adopted by American courts in an attempt to ensure the reliability and usefulness of the scientific and technical information admitted as evidence. We argue that these admissibility criteria are best seen in a dialectical context as a set of critical questions of the kind commonly used in models of argumentation.
Keywords argument  argumentatoion  expert testimony  expert opinion  legal argument  legal argumentation  dialectical model of argumentation
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2006.00331.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,683
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation.Douglas Neil Walton - 1989 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments From Authority.Douglas Neil Walton - 1997 - University Park, PA, USA: Pennsylvania State University Press.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Assessing Relevance.Fabrizio Macagno - 2018 - Lingua 210:42-64.
The Epistemology of Scientific Evidence.Douglas Walton & Nanning Zhang - 2013 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (2):173-219.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
66 ( #166,246 of 2,462,434 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #299,176 of 2,462,434 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes