There is a lot of disagreement among auditors in the best sampling method that is more defensive in a court of law. Those advocating for the statistical sampling method argue that the sampling method carry more evidential weight and the conclusions from the same statistical methods are more defensive due to the low risks in errors that could be drawn in the population. This then provides the court with better quantitative standards that allow for better quantitative outcomes (Sprowls, 2012). Similarly, those auditors favoring the non-statistical ways of approaches believe that using professional judgment will always offer a better measure of defense than those of statistical methods.
On the other hand, the U. S Supreme Court has identified and upheld the use of statistical sampling method and evidence to establish liabilities in various damages in their Fair Labor Standard Act. The U.S Supreme Court faces various criticism on the use of the same statistical evidence, the groups with the critics claim that trial by formula as in the case of statistical evidence does not consider individual differences and violet the due process right to a defendant to provide a defense to claims of individuals.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The same court did not uphold adoption of broad and categorical rules allowing these evidence in various class actions. Instead, the same court did uphold statistical sampling evidence would be implied in areas of disapproval or approval of evidence and not whether the case is of an individual or of a class action. The Supreme Court used the statistical sampling evidence in the Tysons case due to, within the FLSA, the employee would use a statistical sampling method to provide an evidential gap for the case when the employer could not provide adequate records over time. Even though the employee introduces the evidence in the individual case, he could also get entitled to introducing the same case on the class action.
In addition, the courts recommended that fairness and the use of statistical methods of evidence will only depend on circumstantial cases. This judgment recommends that employers keep good and adequate track records for all working hours by employees and this would provide an adequate environment of establishing compensation for time worked. If the employer is able to plan time and payroll records effectively, they are in the best position to counter arguments placed on them by their employees in a court of law to fill an evidential gap ( Martin & Quinn 2013).
Similarly, the upcoming decision by the fourth circuit in the US community will be relatively the first time a circuit court would have weighed on the use of statistical sampling methods and evidence, and this would assist the government as a whole and other related stakeholders to prove on the various frauds and cases related to the same. Let’s look at this case: the expansion of Medicare and other Medicaid to about half of a trillion in dollars as an annual expenditure in the healthcare industry has led to false claims cases more than ever. Recently, the US department of Justice managed to secure about 2billion dollars within the false claims basket within the healthcare, the fiscal year 2014. In cases where the defendants don’t settle the claims, the government is faced with a lot of challenges to provide for liabilities and various damages for the numerous number of persons claiming the Medicare claims ( Finkelstein, 2012).
Due to the impossibility of analysis of various claim by claim fraud cases, the best methods already used to determine the amounts of damages is the statistical sampling method. Many courts have recently considered the use of statistical sampling methods in areas not limited to calculation of damages but also providing liabilities within the false claim bracket.
References
Finkelstein, M. O. (2012). A statistical analysis of guilty plea practices in the federal courts. Harvard Law Review , 293-315.
Martin, A. D., & Quinn, K. M. (2013). Dynamic ideal point estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo for the US Supreme Court, 1953–1999. Political Analysis , 134-153.
Sprowls, R. C. (2012). The admissibility of sample data into a court of law: a case history. UCLA L. Rev. , 4 , 222.
