Law and Contemporary Problems : les "conventions" en science et en droit

Revue émanant de la Duke University School of Law, Law and Contemporary Problems a consacré aux "conventions" en science et en droit un intéressant numéro, entièrement accessible en ligne (Volume 72, Winter 2009, Number 1, Conventions in Science and Law), dirigé par David Michaels and Neil Vidmar.

En voici le sommaire :
Introduction, par David Michaels et Neil Vidmar (p.i)
Irreconcilable Differences? The Troubled Marriage of Science and Law, par Susan Haack (p.1)
Essay: Conventions in Science and in the Courts: Images and Realities, par Jerome R. Ravetz (p.25)
The Arts of Persuasion in Science and Law: Conflicting Norms in the Courtroom, par Herbert M. Kritzer (p.41)
Science, Law and the Expert Witness, par Joseph Sanders (p.63)
How Does Science Come to Speak in the Courts? Citations Intertexts, Expert Witnesses, Consequential Facts, and Reasoning, par Charles Bazerman (p.91)
How Much Evidence is Enough? Conventions of Causal Inference, par David Kriebel (p.121)
Trials and Tribulations: What Happens When Historians Enter the Courtroom, par David Rosner (p.137)
Merton and the Hot Tub: Scientific Conventions and Expert Evidence in Australian Civil Procedure, par Gary Edmond (p.159)
In Defense of "Footnote Four": A Historical Analysis of the New Deal's Effect on Land Regulation in the U.S. Supreme Court, par Christopher S. Dodrill (p.191).