Search for: "David C Dow"
Results 21 - 40
of 102
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2016, 9:20 pm
Sandra Aistars, Arts and Entertainment Advocacy Clinic, George Mason University School of Law: Dow, DiMona, etc. are right. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 1:31 pm
Med. 812 (2000); Esther C. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 1:27 pm
The Dow Chemical Company, David E. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 8:27 am
I offer you the following wager: I have $20 that says that the winner of the 2019 World Series will (a) lose 31 of its first 50 games; (b) find itself behind in in the 7th inning of each deciding game of each postseason series; (c) not win a single game in the Series at home; (d) have a starting left fielder from the Dominican Republic and a starting pitcher whose eyes are two different colors; and that (e) game 6 would be played before a crowd of precisely 43,384, and (f) game 4 would be… [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 10:27 am
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, in which the Supreme Court established the standards for the use of expert and scientific evidence in federal courts. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 2:31 pm
Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (No. 92-102) (proposing that publication in a peer-reviewed journal be the primary criterion for admitting scientifc evidence in the courtroom). [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 8:01 am
Shepherd) Florida State College of Law: Analytical Methods for Lawyers (Murat C. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 4:52 am
Dow had strong evidence that Ms. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 12:03 pm
“It’s very difficult to speculate about Congress . . . about what they would have intended,” he said to Knowles attorney David C. [read post]
25 Dec 2007, 7:53 pm
David R. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 8:27 pm
A sweeping article by George Mason University Law Professor David Bernstein, pointed out that, fantastically, many judges were either unaware of the amendment to one of the most important rules of evidence (really?) [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 8:27 pm
A sweeping article by George Mason University Law Professor David Bernstein, pointed out that, fantastically, many judges were either unaware of the amendment to one of the most important rules of evidence (really?) [read post]
6 May 2013, 5:16 am
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 4:44 am
In the third edition’s chapter on statistics, David Kaye and co-author, the late David A. [read post]
5 May 2023, 9:32 am
Columbia Broadcasting System, a case that established that "[c]rimes and torts committed in news gathering are not protected by the First Amendment" (61 AD2d 491, 494 [1st Dep't 1978]). [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 1:09 pm
Ethics 567 (2011). [5] Ferric C. [read post]
6 May 2010, 7:02 am
Meanwhile, David Lat at Above the Law predicts that the President will nominate Diane Wood on Monday. [read post]
9 Jul 2017, 10:21 am
David H. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am
As a practical matter, the burden shifts to the party that wishes to challenge the relied upon facts and data to learn more about the cited studies to show that the facts and data are not sufficient under Rule 702(b), and that the testimony is not the product of reliable methods under Rule 702(c). [read post]
