Evidence Under the Rules: Text, Cases and Problems

First of all, I recognize the fact that it is a difficult job trying to put together a comprehensive study of evidence. It contains some of the law's more difficult areas including hearsay and character evidence, both of which could be (and are) multi-volume studies unto themselves. That being said, I encountered more than a few problems with this book having nothing to do with the topic.

The case selections are standard, most were on point as far as I can recall. The real problems came in the case notes and explanatory sections. I found myself having to refer to my hornbook again and again in an effort to find some lucid passages on the topic. Instead of explaining in plain terms how the evidentiary rule works, they rely on the cases. Where there are such explanatory sections, they are often far too short for such complicated topics. However, the book's most glaring fault comes from its treatment of the post-case note sections. For most, these passages are extremely important since they show how the law has evolved in the wake of the preceding case. They also frequently offer guides to help the reader interpret the law as applied and give hints as to which points in the opinion have been the most influential. This book offers little in the way of such help, opting instead to ask open-ended questions. These questions quickly become aggravating and are almost totally useless as a learning tool. I realize that the law is not black and white, but there is such thing as a majority rule or prevailing law. I want to read something that I can hang my hat on; I don't want to read "How ought such a case be resolved?" Such questions are neither thought provoking nor helpful.

I also am not a fan of the entire Mueller/Kirkpatrick series. The books are smaller than most, which I like since law books tend to be a pain to carry around. However, smaller dimensions also mean smaller margins, which are difficult to take notes in. This annoyance outweighed the benefits of its size.

Overall, I think there are better evidence books out there. My professor apparently agreed since she announced at the end of the semester that she will be switching to a different text.


Does the job for now...........   September 20, 2009
Xbox 360 owner...with a knack for Halo (New York)
First off---some evidence classes dont use casebooks but instead rely on fact/rule books. Not for my class--and Im glad. Mueller and Kirpatrick do a decent job of eliciting rules and then using cases to highlight the implementation of the rules. One major problem with the book is it tries to be a catch-all for federal and state rules------->and students suffer as a result. Therefore my professor has to go through and tell us which rules the book is discussing.


But so far the book seems fine---Evidence itself is a tough class.


Annoying   April 29, 2010
Charlie Quixote (Brooklyn, NY United States)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful

Chances are reading this book is not your choice. However, allow me to suggest buying and reading a few commercial outlines and an E&E instead. Talk about hiding the ball. There is almost no specific or clear black letter information anywhere. After the authors pose a problem, they offer no answer. Furthermore, the misleading "notes" are phrased in passive-aggressive rhetorical question form. For example. This isn't a very good way to impart information to students, is it? It is repetitive, and annoying, when every sentence ends with a question mark, isn't it? I was irritated every time I tried to read this book for information, wasn't I?