Add to ORKGLawyers for companies subject to federal health, safety and environmental regulation hope that stringent substantive judicial review will relieve their clients of the burdens of much regulation without the need for troublesome legislative battles they seem unable to win. McGarity argues that assigning a Daubert-like (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc) gatekeeper role to courts engaged in judicial review of agency risk assessments is a profoundly bad idea
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
In the Daubert decision of 1993, the Supreme Court directed federal judges to screen expert evidence...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...
Lawyers for companies subject to federal health, safety and environmental regulation hope that strin...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc, the US Supreme Court empowered federal judges to reje...
This broad authority to assess risk, however, leaves too much discretion to administrative agencies....
Since the decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow, courts, legal scholars and the scientific community ha...
This paper describes four types of uncertainty confronted by decisionmakers undertaking risk assessm...
Judicial review of risk regulation rule making in the United States has been a highly controversial ...
Since Daubert, courts have faced difficulty with screening cutting-edge scientific evidence pursuant...
As the number, cost, and complexity of federal regulations have grown over the past twenty years, th...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court replaced the general acce...
In both academic and legislative circles, risk assessment reform is currently a hot topic. In the la...
In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court ar...
In what he describes as a premortem on Joiner v. General Electric Co., a case before the Supreme C...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
In the Daubert decision of 1993, the Supreme Court directed federal judges to screen expert evidence...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...
Lawyers for companies subject to federal health, safety and environmental regulation hope that strin...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc, the US Supreme Court empowered federal judges to reje...
This broad authority to assess risk, however, leaves too much discretion to administrative agencies....
Since the decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow, courts, legal scholars and the scientific community ha...
This paper describes four types of uncertainty confronted by decisionmakers undertaking risk assessm...
Judicial review of risk regulation rule making in the United States has been a highly controversial ...
Since Daubert, courts have faced difficulty with screening cutting-edge scientific evidence pursuant...
As the number, cost, and complexity of federal regulations have grown over the past twenty years, th...
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court replaced the general acce...
In both academic and legislative circles, risk assessment reform is currently a hot topic. In the la...
In the 1993 landmark case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the United States Supreme Court ar...
In what he describes as a premortem on Joiner v. General Electric Co., a case before the Supreme C...
Historically, trial courts have been cautious about allowing juries to hear testimony from scientifi...
In the Daubert decision of 1993, the Supreme Court directed federal judges to screen expert evidence...
There is a generally accepted narrative about the development of the rules governing the admissibili...