Volume Thirty Three -- Book Four

EXPERT ADMISSIBILITY SYMPOSIUM: RELIABILITY STANDARDS— TOO HIGH, TOO LOW, OR JUST RIGHT?
MAIN PAPER PRESENTATIONS: CIVIL CASES
The Merits of the Paternalistic Justification for Restrictions on the Admissibility of Expert Evidence	Joseph Sanders
The Gatekeeping Role in Civil Litigation and the Abdication of Legal Values in Favor of Scientific Values	Neil B. Cohen
COMMENTARIES AND QUESTIONS
Construing Science in the Quest for “Ipse Dixit”: A Comment on Sanders and Cohen	Joe S. Cecil
Daubert Asks the Right Questions: Now Appellate Courts Should Help Find the Right Answers	Christopher B. Mueller
Admissibility Standards as Politics—The Imperial Gate Closers Arrive!!!	Michel F. Baumeister & Dorothea M. Capone
MAIN PAPER PRESENTATIONS: CRIMINAL CASES
Squeezing Daubert Out of the Picture	Richard D. Friedman
The Supreme Court’s “Criminal” Daubert Cases	Paul C. Giannelli
COMMENTARIES AND QUESTIONS
Daubert on a Tilted Playing Field	Roger C. Park
Expert Testimony in Criminal Proceedings: Questions Daubert Does Not Answer	Margaret A. Berger
Battle of the Standards for Experts in Criminal Cases: Police vs. Psychologists	Jennifer L. Groscup & Steven D. Penrod
The Legal and Scientific Evaluation of Forensic Science (Especially Fingerprint Expert Testimony)	Michael J. Saks
A Comment on the Admissibility of Forensic Evidence	R. Erik Lillquist
COMMENTS
The Circumvention of Compulsory Arbitration: Two Bites at the Apple, or a Restoration of Employees’ statutory rights?	Joseph A. Arnold
Undermining and Unintwining: The Right to a Jury Trial and Rule 12(b)(1)	Stefania A. Di Trolio