The interdependence of science and law

Science

Volumn 280, Issue 5363, 1998, Pages 537-538

  Breyer, Stephen ^a  

^a Supreme Court of the United States ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COURT; GOVERNMENT; LAW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCIENCE; SHORT SURVEY; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COMPENSATION; HEALTH HAZARDS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; JUDICIAL ACTION; JUSTICE; LAW; LEGAL APPROACH; SUPREME COURT DECISIONS; TECHNICAL EXPERTISE; TOXICITY; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COMPENSATION AND REDRESS; EXPERT TESTIMONY; FORENSIC MEDICINE; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; JUDICIAL ROLE; JURISPRUDENCE; MEDICINE; SCIENCE; SUPREME COURT DECISIONS; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032562582     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.280.5363.537     Document Type: Short Survey

References (9)

1. Washington v. Glucksberg, 117 S. Ct. 2258 (1997); Vacco v-Quill, 117 S. Ct. 2293 (1997).
2. Kansas v. Hendricks, 117 S. Ct. 2072 (1997).
3. P. W. Huber, in Galileo's Revenge (HarperCollins, New York, 1991), p. 54.
4. General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 118 S. Ct. 512 (1997).
5. J. Weinstein, in Individual Justice in Mass Tort Litigation (Northwestern Univ. Press, Evanston, IL, 1995), p. 116.
6. Evans v. Kelley, 977 F. Supp. 1283 (E. D. Mich. 1997).
7. Amgen v. Biogen, 973 F. Supp. 39 (D. Mass. 1997).
8. Letter from Judge Acker to the Judicial Conference of the United States, et al., 2 January 1998.
9. G. Omenn, Environ. Health Perspect. 102, 674 (1994).