TAILIEUCHUNG - Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 4 P33

Gale Encyclopedia of American Law Volume 4 P33 fully illuminates today's leading cases, major statutes, legal terms and concepts, notable persons involved with the law, important documents and more. Legal issues are fully discussed in easy-to-understand language, including such high-profile topics as the Americans with Disabilities Act, capital punishment, domestic violence, gay and lesbian rights, physician-assisted suicide and thousands more. | EXPLOSIVES 309 are not common knowledge and that are specifically within the knowledge of persons whose experience or study enables them to testify with authority on the subjects in question and 2 matters as to which the conclusions to be drawn from the facts stated as well as knowledge of the facts themselves depend on professional or scientific knowledge not within the range of ordinary training or intelligence. In the first class the facts are stated by the experts and the conclusion is drawn by the jury. In the second class the expert sets forth the facts and states a conclusion in the form of an opinion which may be accepted or rejected by the jury. Accident reconstruction experts typically give testimony that falls into the first class of expert testimony. such experts may testify as to the speed at vehicles were traveling the distance before impact at which each driver began applying the breaks and what if any accident-avoidance precautions each driver took. But accident reconstruction experts are not allowed to give their opinion as to which driver was responsible for the accident or testify as to the standard of care required to be exercised by the drivers. Both types of questions are ultimate issues that only a jury can determine. By contrast in medical malpractice cases physicians may provide the jury with testimony regarding the underlying facts of the legal dispute and may aid the jury by describing the standard of care for diagnosis and treatment. The general rule excluding opinion evidence concerning matters of common knowledge or experience while clear as a matter of principle is frequently difficult to apply. As a result courts are given wide latitude in determining whether the opinions of an expert or lay witness are admissible and appellate courts will not interfere with a lower court s ruling unless in making that ruling the trial court manifestly abused its discretion to the prejudice of the complaining party. FURTHER READINGS Imwinkelried .

• Lĩnh vực khác
• Từ điển ngành luật
• thuật ngữ pháp lý
• luật pháp Hoa Kỳ
• các đạo luật
• điều khoản pháp lý
• luật dân sự
• luật liên bang
• văn bản pháp luật
• tài liệu pháp lý
• Từ điển tiếng Hàn
• Từ vựng tiếng Hàn
• Từ vựng tiếng Hàn theo chủ đề
• Tiếng Hàn căn bản
• Từ vựng tiếng Hàn về chuyên ngành Luật
• Từ vựng tiếng Hàn về xã hội