Search for: "Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano"
Results 1 - 20
of 98
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
’” The Court emphasized its prior decision in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 1:09 pm
In Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 6:36 pm
Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc., 563 F. 3d 171, 178 (6th Cir 2009); Westberry v. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 4:14 pm
’” Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 2:09 pm
Supreme Court Industrial Union Dep’t v. [read post]
7 May 2021, 12:45 pm
” See Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2018, 2:22 pm
Plaintiffs in Daubert v. [read post]
27 Mar 2018, 4:09 pm
He points out that two recent Supreme Court cases — Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 8:53 am
The Circuit rejected Harkonen’s contention that the Supreme Court had announced a new rule with respect to statistical significance, in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 8:22 am
Siracusano: Part I” (Aug. 19, 2011), and “The Transposition Fallacy in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2017, 11:10 am
Gastwirth, “Statistical considerations support the Supreme Court’s decision in Matrixx Initiatives v. [read post]
13 Mar 2017, 2:46 pm
Griffis helpfully narrates the Supreme Court’s evolution in Daubert and then in Joiner, but he fails to address the serious mischief and devolution introduced by the Court’s opinion in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2016, 9:07 am
In 1965, Sir Austin Bradford Hill was appropriately elected to the President of the Royal Society of Medicine. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 12:51 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 7:22 am
Citing the dictum in Matrixx Initiatives[2] as though it were a holding is not only ethically dubious, but also ignores the legal and judicial context of the Court’s statements[3]. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 8:19 pm
When the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 12:38 pm
” In Matrixx Initiatives Inc. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 3:35 pm
Ct. 2459 (2014); Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:29 am
The notorious Wells[4] case was cited by the Supreme Court in Matrixx Initiatives[5] for the proposition that statistical significance was unnecessary. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 12:57 pm
” Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. [read post]
