Suppose you are trying to figure out whether evidence will be admissible at an upcoming federal trial. Obviously, the best place to start is with the text of the Federal Rules of Evidence. But if you think that the text of a particular rule plainly answers the question of admissibility, or simply leaves the question open for argument, you will often be wrong. The case law has diverged from the text of the Federal Rules on many important points.
This divergence comes in two forms: (1) where the case law–defined as at least a fair number of reported cases–is flatly inconsistent with either the text of the Rule, the Advisory Committee Note explaining the text, or both; and (2) where the case law has provided significant development on a point that is not addressed by either the text of the Rule or the Committee Note.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
