Search for: "Frye v. United States"
Results 61 - 80
of 255
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2017, 9:00 am
See United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 7:24 pm
See “Non-publication of legal opinions in the United States. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 11:28 am
On October 20, 2016, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided Motorola Inc. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 11:28 am
On October 20, 2016, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided Motorola Inc. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 11:38 am
United States,293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923). [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 11:38 am
United States,293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923). [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 11:38 am
United States,293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923). [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 7:18 am
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the United States Supreme Court replaced the old Frye test for determining the admissibility of expert evidence with the new Daubert, pursuant to which judges serve as gatekeepers and... [read post]
22 Oct 2016, 2:40 pm
United States, 293 F. 1013 (D. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 4:54 pm
United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:26 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 1:48 pm
Arthur Frank Jumps the Gate Although ostensibly a “Frye” state, Pennsylvania judges have, when moved by the occasion, to apply a fairly thorough analysis of proffered expert witness opinion.[8] On occasion, Pennsylvania judges have excluded unreliably or invalidly supported causation opinions, under the Pennsylvania version of the Frye standard. [read post]
6 Apr 2016, 12:06 pm
United States, 293 F.2d 1013 (D.C. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
It wasn’t until AT&T v. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 9:30 am
Now the law throughout the United States, California has recognized gay marriage since 2008 (though only by those married during the window before Proposition 8 was passed) and then again in 2013 when the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Perry v Hollingsworth overturning the Proposition 8 prohibition. [read post]
20 Oct 2015, 1:11 pm
United States, 293 F. 1013, D.D. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 6:32 am
United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. [read post]
28 May 2015, 2:29 pm
Starrs, “Frye v. [read post]
22 May 2015, 12:26 pm
For example, in Marsh v Smyth, this Court reversed a motion court's Frye ruling. [read post]
20 May 2015, 1:46 pm
In this toxic tort litigation concerning the Pelham Bay landfill, we hold that the reports and findings of the expert epidemiologists and toxicologists satisfy the standard employed in Frye v United States, that of general acceptance in the scientific community. [read post]
