Search for: "State v. Strom"
Results 101 - 107
of 107
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2022, 7:13 am
The Bradford Hill Predicate: Ruling Out Random and Systematic Error In two recent posts, I spent some time discussing a recent law review, which had some important things to say about specific causation.[1] One of several points from which I dissented was the article’s argument that Sir Austin Bradford Hill had not made explicit that ruling out random and systematic error was required before assessing his nine “viewpoints” on whether an association was causal. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm
As a point of context, it’s worth noting that many states already require disclosure or much more draconian regulation of litigation funders backing state court cases—for instance, some states require funds and funders to register, and some even require funding agreements to be disclosed with the state. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 3:04 pm
Citizens United v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:13 pm
Allen v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 7:29 am
It also allowed me to introduce some of the main rivals in the story — Fortas, Lyndon Johnson, Strom Thurmond, James Eastland, etc. [read post]
1 Mar 2007, 4:57 am
If one class of proteins has more activity than the other class, an abnormal state exists and a person becomes either at risk of excessive clotting (thrombosis) or excessive bleeding. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
