Daubert and the proper role for the courts in health, safety, and environmental regulation.
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] T. McGarity. On the Prospect of “Daubertizing” Judicial Review of Risk Assessment , 2003 .
[2] C. Weller,et al. New Approaches to Environmental Law and Agency Regulation: The Daubert Litigation Approach , 2000 .
[3] Lucinda M. Finley. Guarding the Gate to the Courthouse: How Trial Judges are Using Their Evidentiary Screening Role to Remake Tort Causation Rules , 2000 .
[4] D. Truong. Daubert and Judicial Review: How Does An Administrative Agency Distinguish Valid Science from Junk Science? , 2000 .
[5] Erica Beecher-Monas. The Heuristics of Intellectual Due Process: A Primer for Triers of Science , 2000 .
[6] H. Brown. Eight Gates for Expert Witnesses , 1999 .
[7] Mark R. Powell,et al. Science at EPA: Information in the Regulatory Process , 1999 .
[8] H. Feldman. Science and Uncertainty in Mass Exposure Litigation , 1995 .
[9] Thomas O. McGarity,et al. Some Thoughts on “Deossifying” the Rulemaking Process , 1992 .
[10] J. Sanders. The Bendectin Litigation: A Case Study in the Life Cycle of Mass Torts , 1992 .
[11] P. Huber,et al. Science and Tort Law. (Book Reviews: Galileo's Revenge. Junk Science in the Courtroom.) , 1991 .
[12] J. Applegate. The Perils of Unreasonable Risk: Information, Regulatory Policy, and Toxic Substances Control , 1991 .
[13] B. Solomon. Finger-pointing distinguishes attempts to fix blame for liability crisis. , 1986, National journal.
[14] G. Majone. Science and Trans-Science in Standard Setting , 1984 .