Convention All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: The Law and Society Association URL: http://www.lawandsociety.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p181987_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Domitrovich, Stephanie., Merlino, Mara. and Richardson, James. "The Factors Affecting the Appointment of Experts by State Trial Judges: An Exploratory Study" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, TBA, Berlin, Germany, Jul 25, 2007 <Not Available>. 2010-01-24 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p181987_index.html>

Domitrovich, S. , Merlino, M. L. and Richardson, J. , 2007-07-25 "The Factors Affecting the Appointment of Experts by State Trial Judges: An Exploratory Study" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, TBA, Berlin, Germany <Not Available>. 2010-01-24 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p181987_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Abstract: State level judges make vital evidentiary decisions in the adversarial process affecting the lives of many people in many types of cases--from homicide to child abuse. Europeans have long valued the important role that court-appointed experts play in their judicial process to the point that they disfavor a court process considered as adversarial in nature with hired gun experts. Court-appointed experts may create the more accurate social construction of scientific evidence to ascertain the truth and arrive at just determinations. We conducted a mail survey of 183 trial judges from four states (Michigan, Indiana, Texas, and Arizona) with different admissibility standards (Frye, Daubert, or hybrid-type standards). Our survey assessed how state trial judges use their authority to appoint experts and identified factors related to such appointments. Our data suggests judges consider not only applying Daubert trilogy guidelines, but also the impact to parties and their jurisdictions. This suggests the gatekeeping role contributes to a social construction wherein science is created in the courtroom not only from the evidence, but also from the circumstances of these appointments as well as cost to the parties or jurisdiction. Data also included impact on settlement and on perception of procedural justice by the parties. We found differences in frequency of these appointments in family court cases, which occurred more than in both criminal and civil cases. When criminal and civil caseload appointments were compared, criminal case appointments occurred more frequently.

Justice in the Eyes of the Beholder: State Trial Judges’ Views about the Use of Court-Appointed Experts

Court-Appointed Experts in State Trial Courts

Judicial Discourse about Perceptions of Procedural Justice and the Use of Court-Appointed Experts in State Trial Courts