StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Different Legal Cases in the Supreme Court of the US - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
The paper "Different Legal Cases in the Supreme Court of the US" states that each of the cases is noteworthy for what can constitute the admissibility of expert evidence in court cases. The author will examine the basic facts of each case, followed by a brief summary of the precedents each case set…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER95.9% of users find it useful
Different Legal Cases in the Supreme Court of the US
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Different Legal Cases in the Supreme Court of the US"

Ron Steele John Smith Legal Studies 500 22 August This paper will examine four different legal cases brought before the Supreme Court of the United States. Each of the cases is noteworthy for what can constitute the admissibility of expert evidence in court cases. First, I will examine the basic facts of each of the four cases, followed by a brief summary of the precedents each case set. Finally, I will look at how these precedents could affect either an accident investigation, or the work of an occupational safety and health professional in their course of work. The first case setting precedent was the A. Frye v United States ruled on in 1933. In this case, Frye was convicted of 2nd degree murder. Attorneys for the defendant proposed an expert witness to testify as to results he discovered using a ‘deception test’, which is similar to modern day lie detector tests. The expert witness elaborated on how blood pressure is monitored by this device. The expert felt that scientific experiments showed that negative emotions, such as fear or anger, produces a rise in blood pressure. The expert then deduced that the same would occur for someone who is lying, since there would be a fear of detection of the lie. It was further reasoned that speaking truth would be natural, and so no emotion such as guilt or fear would enter the picture, and hence no rise in blood pressure. (FRYE V UNITED STATES) The Supreme Court ruled that there is a difference between (1) expert testimony gained through training and lengthy work experience in the field versus (2) expert testimony that is based on experimental research that has not yet gained solid scientific backing in the science community at large. As a result, the proposed testimony of the expert was not upheld as admissible evidence (FRYE V UNITED STATES). The ‘Frye Standard’ thus became a well known basis for future court cases to allow scientific techniques as admissible evidence only if it is already ‘generally accepted’ in the relevant scientific community. The second case is Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (DAUBERT V MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS, INC) Daubert was a 1993 product liability case where the Supreme Court had to determine what type of scientific evidence is admissible in court. Daubert sued Merrell Dow due to birth defects that occurred in two of their children. The mother was taking the drug Bendectin, which was manufactured by Merrill Dow. Science did not provide a direct link between the drug and any birth defects. Statistical data was proposed as an alternate solution, but statistics can be subject to manipulation, and did not produce consistent results. Merrell Dow felt it has a solid case since no “generally accepted” scientific evidence could be easily found. Daubert argued for a more liberal approach, where other standards could be used instead of the long standing ‘Frye Standard’ as earlier discussed. Both sides called a long list of experts in various fields of medicine, science, history, and sociology to testify their opinions. The Daubert group was led by Professor Ronald Bayer who argued that traditional views of science, which believed progress occurred along well defined and predictable patterns of flow, was not always in reality the case. It was proposed that more liberal decision making was needed by the Court. The Merell Dow group was led by Professor Nicolas Boemberg who advocated that a strict standard, as in the Frye case was correct. After deliberation, Justice Blackman recommended a “gatekeeping role” as a new precedent. By this, Blackman directed judges to evaluate the reliability of the evidence in terms of the validity of the scientific methodology used, and not on general acceptance of the conclusions. Hence, the Daubert case trumped the Frye Standard and allowed judges in the future to have more discretion as a “gatekeeper” to what scientific evidence should be allowed as admissible evidence (DAUBERT V MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS, INC). The third case examined is General Electric v Joiner. This case involves plaintiff Joiner who worked for his employer around dangerous chemicals. Joiner was eventually diagnosed with small-cell lung cancer and sued his employer, General Electric, by stating that the exposure to the work chemicals caused his cancer. Joiner provided expert witnesses to state that the chemicals at his work was likely responsible for his cancer. It should be noted however, that Joiner was a smoker for eight years, along with his parents, and there was a history of lung cancer in his family. Joiner relied on testimony of experts who stated that the PCB chemicals he was exposed to can promote cancer. They stated the same is true of the other chemicals he was exposed to. The experts concluded that exposure was the likely cause of his cancer. A lower court stated that the testimony of the experts did not show a direct link between the PCB chemicals and cancer. The court stated that it was only “subjective belief or unsupported speculation” and not admissible. The ruling was appealed based on the fact that the plaintiffs felt that an “abuse of discretion” occurred. This is on the fact that the earlier Daubert case does allow judge gatekeeping discretion. The plaintiffs felt an ‘abuse’ of the Daubert Principle occurred by not allowing the expert opinions to be admissible. It was eventually upheld that no abuse of judge discretion occurred. This conclusion was based on many factors, including the fact that the expert mentioned that experimentation of his theories never involved humans, but rather laboratory rats. In addition, the expert testimony relied on studies that were limited in scope and did not address well enough or support well enough the idea that the chemicals in this case caused Joiner’s cancer. Hence, the Supreme Court upheld that the lower court judge was proper in his role of excluding the expert testimony and no abuse of the exclusion privileges occurred (GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.V JOINER). The final case is that of Carmichael v. Kumbo Tire Company. In this case, a vehicle that Patrick Carmichael was driving had a tire blowout resulting in one death and several injuries. Suit was made against Kumbo Tire Company for the defective tire produced. A significance of the case was that key testimony of the prosecution was with a Dennis Carlson, Jr. who claimed to be an expert in knowledge of tires. Mr. Carlson had intent to testify that in his expert opinion, a defect in the tire caused the accident. Mr. Carlson went into good detail in his visual and tactile observations of the tire in question. Mr. Carlson had a theory that without at least two of the four indicators of tire abuse occurred; the tire must have resulted from a defect. Kumho Tire motioned to the judge that they wanted the testimony of Mr. Carlson thrown out based on failure to satisfy the Evidence 702 rule which states: “if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact…a witness qualified as an expert…may testify thereto in the form of an opinion.” The court agreed with Kumho Tire and granted a motion to exclude Mr. Carlson’s testimony based on the Daubert precedent, where the trial judge acts as a “gatekeeper” where testimony must be both relevant and reliable to be admissible. The judge looked at the reliability factors in Daubert; namely testing, peer review, error rates, and “acceptability” in the scientific community. The court judge did not find that, so he used his gatekeeper privileges to exclude Mr. Carlson’s testimony (CARMICHAEL V KUMHO TIRE CO). We can see by examining the above cases where the long standing Frye Rule, where the testimony or evidence of experts is only admissible if it is classified as “generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community” was overruled in 1993 by the Daubert Principle where the trial judge acts as a ‘gatekeeper’ to evaluate whether scientific testimony from an expert should be allowed or not. This idea is based Congress’ Federal Rules of Evidence issued in 1975. Rule 702 of that issuance promotes the idea that scientific expert testimony must proceed from “scientific knowledge”. A key point that occupational and health care professionals should keep in mind is which standard current state law is presiding by. M. Kaufman in his research showed how 30 states have adopted the Daubert Principle, while 14 states still hold to the stricter Frye Standard. In addition, there are 7 states that have taken no particular stance to either standard (Kaufman 2). Individuals in the field also need to keep in mind that being an expert in a field does not guarantee under the Daubert principle that scientific evidence presented will be accepted in court. This was the case in Carmichael v Kumbo Tire Co. as the expert testimony of the tire expert was not allowed. This was not based on the question of Mr. Carlson’s expertise in tires, but due to the fact that the methodology presented by Mr. Carlson was not deemed to be both relevant and reliable enough to say that the car accident was caused by the tire in question (CARMICHAEL V KUMBO TIRE CO.) In summary, both the applicable law that a state uses is important to know, along with realizing that judges may exclude evidence if it the methodology used to gather, test, and use the information is not deemed to be relevant and reliable to the case at hand. Works Cited CARMICHAEL V KUMHO TIRE CO. (97-1709) 526 U.S. 137 (1999) DAUBERT V MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 509 U.S. 579 (1993) FRYE V UNITED STATES 293 F. 1013 (D.C. CIR 1923). GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.V JOINER 522 U.S. 136 (1997) Kaufman, M. (2006) The Status of DAUBERT in State Courts. Atlantic Legal Foundation. Web. < http://www.atlanticlegal.org/daubertreport.pdf>. Accessed 22 August 2010. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Court cases Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved de https://studentshare.org/miscellaneous/1569471-court-cases
(Court Cases Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words)
https://studentshare.org/miscellaneous/1569471-court-cases.
“Court Cases Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/miscellaneous/1569471-court-cases.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Different Legal Cases in the Supreme Court of the US

Supreme Court vs The Court of Appeals

The essay "Supreme Court vs The Court of Appeals" focuses on the critical analysis of the extent to which the supreme court and the court of appeals are bound by their own decisions.... he verdict was given by the supreme court (earlier House of Lords) will be binding upon all the courts in the UK and even to the future verdicts of the supreme court.... However, the supreme court can deviate from its earlier verdict if it thinks it is fit to have a different verdict due to transforming social scenarios....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Compare / Contrast IL Courts and Federal Court

The Illinois Supreme Court is housed at the supreme court Building in Springfield (Illinois Supreme Court, 2011).... Article VI of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 embodies the courts that the judiciary should have, which are: the supreme court, Appellate Court and the Circuit Courts (Constitution of the State, 1970).... the supreme court is the highest court in the judicial structure (Illinois' Legal & Judicial, n.... the supreme court determines the errors committed by the appellate court and lower court, and can affirm, reverse or remand the case to the court of origin (Illinois' Legal & Judicial, n....
5 Pages (1250 words) Research Paper

English Legal Systems and Skills

Legal issues identified in the appeal in the supreme court One of the legal issues that were identified by the Supreme Court was whether the claimant's rights had been violated at the hearing in the first instance.... the supreme court is the highest decision-making court in the United Kingdom.... But whenever the supreme court is applying the convention, it is bound to apply the European court jurisprudence.... The United Kingdom has discretion on whether or not to apply the decisions made by the European court in determining cases before it....
7 Pages (1750 words) Essay

The U.S. Supreme Court Powers

In its capacity as the highest court of the land, the supreme court of the United States confers, on lower courts, the mandate and authority to hear cases.... In its capacity as the highest court of the land, the supreme court of the United States confers, on lower courts, the mandate and authority to hear cases (Garner, 2006).... ACS U2IP In its capa as the highest court of the land, the supreme court of the United s confers, on lower courts, the mandate and authority to hear cases (Garner, 2006)....
2 Pages (500 words) Research Paper

The Supreme Court of the United States

The paper "the supreme court of the United States" highlights that abandoned property is defined as any property which has been deserted by the owner.... the supreme court of the United States is the top court of the federal court system.... The president of the us has the power to nominate the justices and their appointments are sanctioned according to the advice and consent of the senate.... the supreme court comprises a chief justice and nine judges who are known as justices....
7 Pages (1750 words) Essay

Deciding to decide review

Lower courts determine their cases independently, but the supreme court has to come in and handle petitions after they have been determined to be certworthy when need be.... Petitions filed at the supreme court are.... The ultimate objective here is to Deciding to Decide Review Affiliation: The role played by the supreme court is ultimately fundamental.... Lower courts determine their cases independently, but the supreme court has to come in and handle petitions after they have been determined to be certworthy when need be....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

English Legal Systems and Skills

ne of the legal issues that were identified by the supreme court was whether the claimant's rights had been violated at the hearing in the first instance.... This report "English legal Systems and Skills" focuses on the case that was an allegation that the claimant had sexually assaulted a fifteen-year-old schoolboy who was undergoing a short period of work experience at the school where the claimant had been newly employed as music assistance.... The legal issue to be proved at first instance was whether there was any form of sexual contact between the claimant and the boy....
7 Pages (1750 words) Report

Supreme Court Philosophies and Rulings

Rehnquist influenced changes within the supreme court of the United States.... Burger induced changes to the operations conducted by the supreme court of the United States.... The report considers the makeup of the us Supreme Court.... This report "Supreme Court Philosophies and Rulings" aims at discussing the supreme court and its mandate in implementing the United States Constitution.... A lot of transformations took place within the supreme court....
5 Pages (1250 words) Report
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us