Sign In Sign Up Contact

Search

BROWSE SEARCH SPINDOC HELP

Browse from Bias or interest

view tree to see hierarchy and quickly navigate

view icon key

Law »

Courts »

Evidence »

Admissibility of evidence »

Expert and scientific evidence »

Must expert evidence be generally acceptable to experts or must the trial court make an independent assessment of the validity and reliability of such evidence? »

Trial court must act as gatekeeper and make independent assessment »

The scientific character of a purportedly scientific field or method must be shown »

Dowsing unscientific: Dowsing is unscientific...

136939:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:false:!143732!:false:-1:-1

Rule: a rule of law

Dowsing is unscientific -- it is junk science -- and it does not meet the requirements under Federal Rule of Evidence for the admissibility of expert evidence.

Contributed in 2009 & last edited in 2009 by Peter Tillers

All (1) Cases (1) Statutes, Regs, Rules (0)

1 case authority.

Sorted By Date Sort By Court

You've come to a rule

. Check out the authorities below. When you find one you like, add it to your SpinDoc. more...

Please sign in or sign up to see the authorities.

Contribution Suggestions

complete authority for rule...

Rule: a rule of law

To be admissible, prior events or accidents must be substantially similar to those at issue in trial.

vouch for authority for rule...

Exception: a rule that is an exception to a general rule

The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause places no limits on the admission at trial of nonhearsay statements made prior to or outside of trial.

vouch for authority for rule...

Rule: a rule of law

Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statements is not barred by the partial federal codification in Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b) of the...

view more suggestions