Search for: "FRYE v. STATE"
Results 121 - 140
of 506
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Aug 2016, 2:33 pm
Porter 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
Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), and to no longer apply the standard in Frye v. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
It wasn’t until AT&T v. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 7:49 am
The plaintiff in Sean R. v. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
This Daubert standard updated the Frye standard, which has been around much longer and is still applied by many state courts. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 9:30 am
The US Supreme Court, in Obergefell v. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 9:11 am
The argument states that “Justice Harry Anstead noted the “open issue” in a 2007 (Marsh v. [read post]
20 Oct 2015, 1:11 pm
Pennsylvania is one of the minority of states that have not adopted Daubert and that ostensibly pay homage to the District of Columbia Circuit’s 1923 Frye decision (Frye v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 9:17 am
Porter v. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 12:00 pm
Facts: The core of this case (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 6:32 am
Frye v. [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]
7 Apr 2015, 1:32 pm
The motion court denied the City's motions for summary judgment in all nine actions, stating that in the instant motion, the City raises no new facts or law to warrant a departure from the prior holding of the Appellate Division, First Department in NonnonI. [read post]
5 Apr 2015, 1:41 pm
As the Court of Appeals stated in People v. [read post]
4 Apr 2015, 1:37 pm
In Parker v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 1:27 pm
Bernard stated that he was unaware whether this data was available or had been analyzed. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 1:21 pm
Neugebauer stated that the superiority of this type of proximity analysis was well-established. [read post]
