The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Third Edition, assists judges in managing cases involving complex scientific and technical evidence by describing the basic tenets of key scientific fields from which legal evidence is typically derived and by providing examples of cases in which that evidence has been used. First published in 1994 by the Federal Judicial Center, the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence has been relied upon in the legal and academic communities and is often cited by various courts and others. Judges faced with disputes over the admissibility of scientific and technical evidence refer to the manual to help them better understand and evaluate the relevance, reliability and usefulness of the evidence being proffered. The manual is not intended to tell judges what is good science and what is not. Instead, it serves to help judges identify issues on which experts are likely to differ and to guide the inquiry of the court in seeking an informed resolution of the conflict. The core of the manual consists of a series of chapters (reference guides) on various scientific topics, each authored by an expert in that field. The topics have been chosen by an oversight committee because of their complexity and frequency in litigation. Each chapter is intended to provide a general overview of the topic in lay terms, identifying issues that will be useful to judges and others in the legal profession. They are written for a non-technical audience and are not intended as exhaustive presentations of the topic. Rather, the chapters seek to provide judges with the basic information in an area of science, to allow them to have an informed conversation with the experts and attorneys. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Introduction--Stephen Breyer</li>
<li>The Admissibility of Expert Testimony--Margaret A. Berger</li>
<li>How Science Works--David Goodstein</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Forensic Identification Expertise--Paul C. Giannelli, Edward J. Imwinkelried, and Joseph L. Peterson</li>
<li>Reference Guide on DNA Identification Evidence--David H. Kaye and George Sensabaugh</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Statistics--David H. Kaye and David A. Freedman</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Multiple Regression--Daniel L. Rubinfeld</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Survey Research--Shari Seidman Diamond</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Estimation of Economic Damages--Mark A. Allen, Robert E. Hall, and Victoria A. Lazear</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Exposure Science--Joseph V. Rodricks</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Epidemiology--Michael D. Green, D. Michal Freedman, and Leon Gordis</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Toxicology--Bernard D. Goldstein and Mary Sue Henifin</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Medical Testimony--John B. Wong, Lawrence O. Gostin, and Oscar A. Cabrera</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Neuroscience--Henry T. Greely and Anthony D. Wagner</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Mental Health Evidence--Paul S. Appelbaum</li>
<li>Reference Guide on Engineering--Channing R. Robertson, John E. Moalli, and David L. Black</li>
<li>Appendix A: Biographical Information of Committee and Staff</li>
<li>Index</li>
</ul>

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

Policy and Global Affairs

Committee on Science, Technology, and Law

Federal Judicial Center

Committee on the Development of the Third Edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence

National, Research Council

Legal Education

National Academies Press

This manual is produced under the auspices of the Federal Judicial Center, and is intended primarily for use in federal courts. However, the principles of management and many of the techniques it describes may be useful in criminal cases, in state courts, and in routine federal civil litigation. Describes resolution of complex litigation without loss of protections afforded by the adversarial system of justice.

Manual for Complex Litigation, 4th

Reference

Thomson/West

Manual for complex litigation: With amendments to June 3, 1977 (Federal practice)

C. Boardman Co

Reference Manual for Scientific Evidence

Clark, Boardman, Callaghan

Judicial Writing Manual A Pocket Guide for Judges Second Edition Federal Judicial Center The link between courts and the public is the written word. With rare exceptions, it is through judicial opinions that courts communicate with litigants, lawyers, other courts, and the community. Whatever the court’s statutory and constitutional status, the written word, in the end, is the source and the measure of the court’s authority. It is therefore not enough that a decision be correct—it must also be fair and reasonable and readily understood. The burden of the judicial opinion is to explain and to persuade and to satisfy the world that the decision is principled and sound. What the court says, and how it says it, is as important as what the court decides. It is important to the reader. But it is also important to the author because in the writing lies the test of the thinking that underlies it. “Good writing,” Ambrose Bierce said, “essentially is clear thinking made visible.” Ambrose Bierce, Write It Right 6 (rev. ed. 1986). To serve the cause of good opinion writing, the Federal Judicial Center has prepared this manual. It is not held out as an authoritative pronouncement on good writing, a subject on which the literature abounds. Rather, it distills the experience and reflects the views of a group of experienced judges, vetted by a distinguished board of editors. No one of them would approach the task of writing an opinion, or describe the process, precisely as any of the others would. Yet, though this is a highly personal endeavor, some generally accepted principles of good opinion writing emerge and they are the subject of this manual. We hope that judges and their law clerks will find this manual helpful and that it will advance the cause for which it has been prepared. William W Schwarzer Director Emeritus, Federal Judicial Center

Judicial Writing Manual

CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform

At the request of the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Manage-ment (CACM), the Federal Judicial Center conducted a survey of district court judges to assess the frequency with which jurors used social media to communicate during trials and deliberations in the past two years, and to identify strategies for curbing this behavior. The survey also assessed the frequency with which attorneys use social media to conduct research on potential jurors during voir dire. The survey is a follow-up to one conducted in 2011 on jurors' use of social media; attorneys' use of social media was not addressed in the original survey. The results, based on the responses of 494 responding judges, indicate that detected social media use by jurors is infrequent and that most judges have taken steps to ensure jurors do not use social media in the courtroom. The most common strategies are using plain language to explain the reason behind the ban and incorporating social media use into jury instructions' either the model jury instructions provided by CACM or judges' own personal jury instructions. Judges admit that it is difficult to police jurors. Only 33 judges re-ported instances of detected social media use by jurors during trial or deliberations. Attorneys' use of social media to research prospective jurors during voir dire is difficult to detect and quantify; most judges do not know whether attorneys are accessing potential jurors' social media profiles during voir dire, and most judges do not address the issue with attorneys.

Jurors’ and Attorneys’ Use of Social Media During Voir Dire, Trials, and Deliberations: A Report to the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management

Politics & Social Sciences

Politics & Government

What is Section 1983?“Section 1983” refers to 42 U.S.C. §1983, the federal statute that enables you to file a civil action for deprivation of constitutional and federal statutory rights by persons acting under “color of law.” Originally enacted in 1871, Section 1983 litigation experienced a period of dormancy, until 1961 and the landmark Supreme Court case, Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), which gave private litigants a federal court remedy as a first resort rather than only in default of (or after) state action. Today, Section 1983 actions most commonly involve 1st Amendment issues like freedom of speech; 4th Amendment issues like search and seizure or use of force; 8th Amendment issues like cruel and unusual punishment; and 14th Amendment claims of due process violations.

Section 1983 Litigation (Civil Rights Actions)

Karen M. Blum

Kathryn R. Urbonya

Constitutional Law

In April 2007, the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules asked the Federal Judicial Center to update its 2004 report on local rules of the U.S. district courts, state laws, and state court rules that address the disclosure principles contained in Brady v. Maryland. Brady requires that prosecutors fully disclose to the accused all exculpatory evidence in the prosecutors’ possession. Subsequent Supreme Court decisions have elaborated the Brady obligations to include the duty to disclose (1) impeachment evidence, (2) favorable evidence in the absence of a request by the accused, and (3) “favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case including the police.” When it requested the 2004 report, the committee’s interest was in learning whether federal district courts and state courts have adopted any formal rules or standards that provide prosecutors with specific guidance on discharging their Brady obligations. Specifically, the committee wanted to know whether the U.S. district and state courts’ relevant authorities (1) codify the Brady rule, (2) set specific deadlines for when Brady material must be disclosed, or (3) require Brady material to be disclosed automatically or only on request. In addition, the Center sought information regarding policies in two areas: (1) due diligence obligations of the government to locate and disclose Brady material favorable to the defendant, and (2) sanctions for the government’s failure to comply specifically with Brady disclosure obligations. That research resulted in a report titled Treatment of Brady v. Maryland Material in United States District and State Courts’ Rules, Orders, and Policies. This 2007 report has two sections and five appendices. Section I presents a general introduction to the report, along with a summary of our findings. Section II describes the federal district court local rules, orders, and policies that address Brady material. Appendix A contains the committee’s proposed amendment to Rule 16. Appendix B is a compendium of federal material that served as the basis for this report. Appendix C provides examples of individual judge orders addressing Brady disclosures. Appendix D contains the U.S. Attorney’s Manual, section 9-5.000, Issues Related to Trials and Other Court Proceedings, which covers the Department of Justice’s policy regarding disclosure of exculpatory and impeachment information. Appendix E includes the state court portion of the 2004 Brady report.

Brady v. Maryland Material in the United States District Courts: Rules, Orders, and Policies: Report to the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States

Laural Hooper

Shelia Thorpe

Rules & Procedures

This guide is not intended as a comprehensive treatment of this important topic, but rather as a brief overview and a prompt to begin communication. There are a number of excellent resources on this topic, including the Federal Judicial Center’s Manual for Complex Litigation, Fourth, and the National Center for State Courts’ 2006 commentary on the Manual for state judges. These resources and many others are listed in the Appendix. Each section below also includes suggested readings.

Coordinating Multijurisdiction Litigation: A Pocket Guide for Judges

National Center for State Courts

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

This manual is not intended to proclaim the right way of writing an opinion. Anyone who attempts to announce authoritative rules of good writing invites debate and comparison. As one judge said, "I have one overarching rule. That is, don't have any such rules." Indeed, in a leading text on good writing, E. B. White acknowledged that "[s]tyle rules of this sort are, of course, somewhat a matter of individual preference, and even the established rules of grammar are open to challenge."Instead, the purpose of the manual is to stimulate judges to think as systematically about writing their opinions as they do about deciding their cases. Judges should ask themselves: Am I writing this way because this is how I've always done it, or is there a better way? Is there a reason for organizing the opinion this way? For including these particular facts? For discussing this issue at length? For citing this case? Is this sentence clear? Are all the words in it necessary?In the following parts, the manual takes readers through the opinion-writing process. Part 2 suggests issues to consider in deciding whether to write a formal opinion, a memorandum, or an unpublished opinion. Part 3 discusses steps a judge should take before starting to write. Part 4 discusses the organization and content of an opinion. Part 5 offers suggestions on language, style, and editing. Part 6 presents considerations for cowriting an opinion, commenting on the opinions of other members of the court, and writing dissenting and concurring opinions. Part 7 contains a list of books and articles that may be useful to those who want to read more about judicial writing. The appendices provide examples of some of the writings discussed in the manual, such as summary orders and dissenting opinions.

Judicial Writing Manual: A Pocket Guide for Judges

See the best price to sell, buy, or rent books by Federal Judicial Center. BookScouter helps to compare book prices from 25+ online bookstores and 30+ buyback vendors with a single search.

Books by Federal Judicial Center