Add to ORKGDr. Huber describes phantom risks as those tending to hover indefinitely, never to crystallize. He argues that legal procedures should optimally lead\u27 to closure and eliminate unwarranted fears
Since Daubert, courts have faced difficulty with screening cutting-edge scientific evidence pursuant...
One of the most important issues for science in the courtroom is the determination of causality. Lik...
Public risks are precisely the risks that have recently captured the attention of the legal communit...
Dr. Huber describes phantom risks as those tending to hover indefinitely, never to crystallize. He...
[Excerpt] The frequency and magnitude of risks and benefits are facts. The acceptability of risks a...
Critics of the tort system have condemned courts for their alleged leniency in admitting scientific ...
This paper analyzes the potential for science courts to address the social need to regulate human ca...
This article, part of a symposium on the opinion of the Arizona Supreme Court in Logerquist v. McVey...
The opinions of experts in prediction in civil commitment hearings should help the courts, but over ...
This paper describes four types of uncertainty confronted by decisionmakers undertaking risk assessm...
Lawyers for companies subject to federal health, safety and environmental regulation hope that strin...
Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use ...
In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court ar...
Why some harms count before the courts and others do not is a matter of acute expressive and practic...
The Supreme Court is about to hear Dura Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Broudo, a case in which the Ninth Ci...
Since Daubert, courts have faced difficulty with screening cutting-edge scientific evidence pursuant...
One of the most important issues for science in the courtroom is the determination of causality. Lik...
Public risks are precisely the risks that have recently captured the attention of the legal communit...
Dr. Huber describes phantom risks as those tending to hover indefinitely, never to crystallize. He...
[Excerpt] The frequency and magnitude of risks and benefits are facts. The acceptability of risks a...
Critics of the tort system have condemned courts for their alleged leniency in admitting scientific ...
This paper analyzes the potential for science courts to address the social need to regulate human ca...
This article, part of a symposium on the opinion of the Arizona Supreme Court in Logerquist v. McVey...
The opinions of experts in prediction in civil commitment hearings should help the courts, but over ...
This paper describes four types of uncertainty confronted by decisionmakers undertaking risk assessm...
Lawyers for companies subject to federal health, safety and environmental regulation hope that strin...
Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use ...
In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court ar...
Why some harms count before the courts and others do not is a matter of acute expressive and practic...
The Supreme Court is about to hear Dura Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Broudo, a case in which the Ninth Ci...
Since Daubert, courts have faced difficulty with screening cutting-edge scientific evidence pursuant...
One of the most important issues for science in the courtroom is the determination of causality. Lik...
Public risks are precisely the risks that have recently captured the attention of the legal communit...