Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (sometimes shortened to ECREE), [1] also known as the Sagan standard, is an aphorism popularized by science communicator Carl Sagan. He used the phrase in his 1979 book Broca's Brain and the 1980 television program Cosmos .
A court order is an official proclamation by a judge (or panel of judges) that defines the legal relationships between the parties to a hearing, a trial, an appeal or other court proceedings. [2] Such ruling requires or authorizes the carrying out of certain steps by one or more parties to a case.
The quantum of evidence is the amount of evidence needed; the quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered. Important rules that govern admissibility concern hearsay , authentication , relevance , privilege , witnesses , opinions , expert testimony , identification and rules of physical evidence .
Carl Sagan proposed a related criterion – "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" – which is known as the Sagan standard. [ 2 ] While certain kinds of arguments, such as logical syllogisms , require mathematical or strictly logical proofs , the standard for evidence to meet the burden of proof is usually determined by context ...
First adopted in 1975, the Federal Rules of Evidence codify the evidence law that applies in United States federal courts. [1] In addition, many states in the United States have either adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence, with or without local variations, or have revised their own evidence rules or codes to at least partially follow the federal rules.
An offer of proof is a kind of motion that a lawyer may present to a judge or to the official presiding over a hearing. It is an explanation made by an attorney to a judge during trial to show why a question which has been objected to as immaterial or irrelevant will lead to evidence of value to proving the case of the lawyer's client.
The Washington Supreme Court says that under state law, it’s OK for judges to award extraordinary damages in so-called “wrongful life” cases where a child has birth defects or disabilities ...
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case "to resolve a conflict among the Courts of Appeals as to whether the trial court must make a preliminary finding before 'similar act' and other Rule 404(b) evidence is submitted to the jury." [4] Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the unanimous court. Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence states: [5]