Per Sheila Scheuerman at TortsProf, the "Georgia Supreme Court on Monday upheld the expert witness section (Section 7) of Georgia's 2005 tort reform law." The constitutional attack on the law had focused on its holding of expert evidence in civil litigation to a more demanding standard than that in criminal proceedings. If the real point were to address the disadvantage such an anomaly might pose to criminal defendants -- as opposed to just reaching for a convenient argument in hopes of derailing the civil reform law -- wouldn't the better course would have been to challenge the criminal-side admissibility rules as unconstitutionally lax?
Georgia high court upholds expert witness rules
- How much is the Bluetooth settlement injunction worth?
- Around the web, February 21
- Preempro jackpot justice verdicts in Philadelphia
- Chesley experts in two cases drop testimony
- Troy Davis execution
- Liability for thee, but not for me
- Troy Davis
- Texas Supreme Court finishes off Garza v. Merck
- Cy pres slush fund in Georgia under ethics investigation
- "Win or lose, trial lawyers get millions in Vioxx fees"
- Dewey v. Volkswagen opening brief
- What the heck is going on in King County family court?
- Around the web, July 12
- Podcast on Wal-Mart v. Dukes
- $322M verdict for phantom asbestosis
Center for Legal Policy at the