Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 AUGUST 2006

Evidentiary Use of Novel Computer-Generated Animation Upheld in Pennsylvania

Society has become increasingly dependent upon computers in business and in our personal lives. With each technological advancement, the practice of law becomes more sophisticated and, commensurate with this progress, the legal system must adapt.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Robert Conrad
Robert Conrad
David Wallace
David Wallace

See

Commonwealth v. Serge, 896 A.2d 1170 (Pa., April 25, 2006)

Society has become increasingly dependent upon computers in business and in our personal lives. With each technological advancement, the practice of law becomes more sophisticated and, commensurate with this progress, the legal system must adapt. Courts are facing the need to shed any technophobia and become more willing to embrace the advances that have the ability to enhance the efficacy of the legal system.

Id

. at 1176.

Visualizing the Theory of the Case

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently took up this mantle in Serge, a criminal appeal involving the Commonwealth’s use of computer-generated animation (CGA) in a murder trial. Though Serge was a criminal action, the issue it addresses -- the standard for admitting CGAs at trial -- is certainly relevant to product liability litigation, as product manufacturers often use CGAs at trial to illustrate expert testimony (such as testimony relating to automobile accident

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from