Jules Epstein

September 25, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

A new study says that for injured plaintiffs, race/ethnicity may make it harder to get a lawyer.

By Jules Epstein

3 minute read

July 12, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

At least some facial identifications are reliable (see, e.g., familiar identifications of a previously well-known individual). The question is—can the same be said when the perpetrator was fully masked and all that was visible were his eyes?

By Jules Epstein

8 minute read

May 10, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

Lay witnesses may not cross a line and give testimony that is "based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702." That's for experts, and with expert testimony comes discovery obligations such as reports and CVs.

By Jules Epstein

8 minute read

May 03, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

Pennsylvania law, as does federal, permits a person accused of a crime to "defend" in part by proving their "good" character, limited to the pertinent trait. If the crime is robbery or assault, the defense is that the accused is nonviolent; and if the crime charged is forgery or theft, that the person is honest.

By Jules Epstein

3 minute read

March 25, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

An expert with knowledge that jurors don't have should be permitted to testify when that knowledge will inform the decisionmaker and meets the basic relevance threshold.

By Jules Epstein

5 minute read

March 11, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

Elevating religion over the right to a fair trial has no place in our constitutional scheme, even as the "wall" between church and state erodes. Putting religion first is not about fair trials but instead about protecting the right to despise "the other," regardless of cost.

By Jules Epstein

4 minute read

January 19, 2024 | The Legal Intelligencer

The question lawyers need to ponder—and adversaries need to pounce upon—is whether that same admonition applies to what lawyers say in their openings and closings, with the added concern that the warning will be anything you say SHALL be used against you, and you can't dispute it.

By Jules Epstein

4 minute read

November 16, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer

"Primacy" is a far cry from "tribalistic arguments" (or the cigar trick) and there is strong reason to treat the two as radically different and as not both being barred from the courtroom by "law and rules."

By Jules Epstein

5 minute read

September 21, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer

Even when AI and ChatGPT are not used, completeness is the rule. Failure to follow it is easily caught and highlighted by your opponent, and the resulting fallout is just too damaging and too damning.

By Jules Epstein

4 minute read

August 04, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer

May Rule 403 restrict or even lead to the exclusion of expert testimony that passes the Frye test? The answer is "maybe," and advice from "down under" in Australia suggests that rule as a potent tool.

By Jules Epstein

5 minute read