Evidence Coursework

Order 100% Plagiarism free paper

1. “Centralized coordination, reinforced by a strong organizational culture, creates and sustains uniformity in personnel policy and practice throughout the organizational units of The Firm. Subjective and discretionary features of the company’s personnel policy and practice make decisions about compensation and promotion vulnerable to gender bias.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? Yes

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert? Yes

 

This testimony is relevant because it shows the results of uniformity and centralized coordination in personnel policies and practices in an organization. This testimony needs opinion of an expert to explain the theory and findings and this witness is qualified as an expert because he has acquired the necessary education needed to serve as an expert.

 

 

2. “The first barrier to gender equality in the workplace was the exclusion of women from all but a handful of historically female jobs”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? No

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? No

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert? Yes, if allowed

 

This set of facts is beyond the scope of the issues related to the case.  This case involves specific disparate treatment claims and not the hiring practices of the firm.  However, if this testimony is allowed, the jury will need not need expert testimony to support the statement.  Employment history and the progression of our country have shown this statement to be true in the past and would constitute common knowledge.  However, if the plaintiff wanted to prove that the Firm was presently participating in such practices had some research evidence to prove the Firm was excluding women by discrimination, and then the witness would have to be qualified.  Now, since the Dalbert case, it is no longer necessary that the principles that form the bases for the expert’s opinion be accepted in the scientific community.  Under the Dalbert decision, the judge must make their own independent decision based on all available information on whether the expert testimony will assist the jury, determine if the information is reliable and whether it relates to the facts in the case.  Since Dalbert was not a constitutional case, it is only binding in fed court.  Note, California has rejected the Dalbert case under People v. Lahey and use the Kelly-Frye rule which requires that expert’s testimony be generally accepted in the scientific community.

 

 

3. “Women at Firm outnumbered men by nearly two to one in the hourly ranks and in support staff positions including reception, paralegals, secretarial roles.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant?  No

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes, if allowed

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert? Yes, if testimony is allowed

 

This set of facts is beyond the scope of the issues related to the case.  This case involves specific disparate treatment claims and not the typical types of employment positions filled by certain gender groups.  This information would tend to prejudice the jury into thinking there was some discriminatory reason for women who fill support staff positions.  This information could work in the contrary of women’s ability to gain support staff positions in that it would imply that men were possibly being discriminated in gaining these staff positions.

 

However, if this testimony was allowed, so study into these facts would have to be produced and explained to the jury.  The witness testifying to this information would have to be qualified.  The Plaintiff’s witness would be qualified in this area since he was had vast experience in study methods.

 

4. “Women’s representation at every position within the Firm drops with each step up the job hierarchy.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant?  Yes

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert?  Yes

 

This information is relevant to show a pattern of promotions for the firm.  However, this information is not conclusive of any discrimination pattern unless there are other facts such as equally qualified women being passed up.  This information will assist the jury to understand the pattern of promotion and weigh this fact with any other pertinent facts that may exist.  This information in itself does not necessitate an expert witness but if it is going to be used in any specific way to demonstrate a pattern of discrimination, then an expert will be necessary to connect the nexus for the propositions.

 

 

5. “The proportion of women in firm management, at the level of executive committees or as head of practice groups, is minuscule.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? Yes

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert?  Yes

 

As in the last question, this information would be relevant if coupled with another fact such as discrimination and most importantly, a nexus.  In this case, the jury would need explanation to connect the two propositions.  Expert testimony would be necessary to connect the two propositions; however, if the only concern was the relevant testimony relating to the proportion of women in the executive level, the facts could speak for themselves and not require a qualified expert. In this case, the expert is qualified to testify although may not be necessary testimony.

 

 

6. “As a group, women possessed the varied physical and intellectual qualities necessary to litigate cases. Thus the exclusion of this essentially equal group of applicants could be attributed only to irrational prejudice or inaccurate stereotypes.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? Yes

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert?  Yes

 

This testimony would be relevant if the proper foundation is offered.  First offer of prove would involve the fact that women possess qualities necessary to litigate cases.  Once this is offered, then there would have to be an offer of proof that exclusion is attributed only to irrational prejudice or inaccurate stereotypes.  Irrational prejudice and inaccurate stereotype propositions will have to be explained for the jury to understand in the context that it is being offered.  This type of information would require an expert to explain.  This witness with his experience on employment discrimination is more of a general overview.  This proposition involves more than just issues of social inequality as reflected in statistical studies.  This requires an understanding of human behavior which are beyond the scope of this expert witness, so in this context, he would not be qualified.

 

 

7. “Women now constitute over 40% of law school graduates and almost 40% of associates at large law firms. Despite this progress, less than 13% of partners in large law firms are women.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? Yes

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? Yes

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert?  Yes

 

This information could be relevant if there is a nexus between the numbers of women in these positions and the fact that there are fewer partners in law firms proportionately.  Again, there would have to be more facts for this statistic to have any relevance.  It would not stand alone.  The jury would need a theory to suggest there is something nefarious behind this discrepancy.  The witness has the qualifications for this testimony based on his education in statistics.

 

 

8. “Firm has hired less than 30% female associates and of its _________ full partners numbering ________ only ________ are women or less than _______%.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? No

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence?  Not in its present form

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert?  Yes if info is complete

 

This information in its present form is worthless.  If it is used as a statistical formula and it can be proven that this is the way it is everywhere and including all variables, then maybe it could be of some value.  In that case, there would be a need for a jury to hear an explanation of the formula and the interpretation of number values placed in the blank spots.  If the formula was proven to be valid and the number values placed in the formula were accurate, then the interpretation could be done by this expert witness because of his experience and education in the evaluation of statistical data.

 

 

 

9. “These norms shape intangibles such as the ‘appropriate’ professional demeanor: the tone of voice, air of command, and quickness to accommodate or anger that mark a ‘successful’ employee. They also dictate the acceptable forms of professional camaraderie, and prescribe the boundaries between the workplace and the rest of the world-boundaries that have defined the care of children as the province of those who are not workers.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? No

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? I think I need an expert to explain this nonsense.

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert? No

 

This statement seems to be an overview of someone’s opinion about people who care for their children at home and workers who do not mixed with forms of communication in the workplace.  The correlation here would be a stretch to say the least.  It would be confusing for a jury and cause further confusion trying to explain the point.

 

 

10. “When women perform successfully in male-dominated contexts, their accomplishments are more likely to be attributed to luck, help from others, or special circumstances rather than to their ability, whereas comparable performance by men is more likely to be attributed to their superior skills.  Women have been expected to make their way by conforming to these norms. This expectation has emerged in part because demanding conformity to pre-existing norms is one way of protesting the access of women to the workplace.”

 

1)    Is the testimony relevant? No

 

2)    Does the Jury Need Expert Testimony or will such testimony assist the jury to understand the evidence? This is an irrelevant statement

 

3)    Is the Witness Qualified To Serve as an Expert? No

 

Again, this statement is a nonsense opinion that would require more confusing explanations.  I do not see how “Luck” could be objectively analyzed.  No witness would be qualified to explain the phenomena of “Luck”.  This statement also claims a conclusion that this conformity is present and expected by society.  Therefore, I do not see any relevance to this statement.

source..