1991•ThinkTech (Texas Tech University)Requires access

Exploring the Inconsistencies of Scrutinizing Expert Testimony under the Federal Rules of Evidence

Kimberly S. Moore

Abstract

Explores the inconsistencies of scrutinizing expert testimony. The author discusses the evolution and basics of expert testimony. The author also proposes a remedy that can serve as a basis for a solution, which will achieve the level of uniformity the Federal Rules of Evidence were designed to inspire.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Key concepts: Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules of evidence, Political science, Epistemology, Computer science, Data science, Law and economics, Law