• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • UMass Chan Faculty and Staff Research and Publications
    • UMass Chan Faculty and Researcher Publications
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • UMass Chan Faculty and Staff Research and Publications
    • UMass Chan Faculty and Researcher Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of eScholarship@UMassChanCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsUMass Chan AffiliationsTitlesDocument TypesKeywordsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsUMass Chan AffiliationsTitlesDocument TypesKeywords

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutSubmission GuidelinesData Deposit PolicySearchingAccessibilityTerms of UseWebsite Migration FAQ

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    General Electric Co. v. Joiner: lighting up the post-Daubert landscape

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    Grudzinskas, Albert J. Jr.
    Appelbaum, Kenneth L.
    UMass Chan Affiliations
    Department of Psychiatry
    Document Type
    Journal Article
    Publication Date
    1998-10-24
    Keywords
    Biphenyl Compounds
    *Expert Testimony
    Fungicides, Industrial
    Humans
    Lung Neoplasms
    Male
    *Occupational Exposure
    Social Justice
    United States
    Health Services Research
    Law
    Mental and Social Health
    Psychiatric and Mental Health
    Psychiatry
    Psychiatry and Psychology
    Show allShow less
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Link to Full Text
    http://www.jaapl.org/content/26/3/497.short
    Abstract
    The U.S. Supreme Court considered an appeal by the defendant, General Electric Co., in a products liability action. The appeal resulted from the ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit that overturned the district court's exclusion of evidence of cancer causation. The Supreme Court held that questions of the admissibility of such evidence are reviewable under the same standard--abuse of discretion--as are other decisions regarding evidentiary issues and are not subject to a more stringent standard of review. The Court further held that whether or not the evidence is excluded or is dispositive of the case does not change this standard of review. The Court then examined and upheld the decision by the trial court rather than remanding the action to the circuit court for reconsideration in light of the decision. Coupled with a series of recent circuit court of appeals decisions, the case establishes some guidance for the basis and methodology to be used to admit social science evidence in future cases.
    Source
    J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1998;26(3):497-503.
    Permanent Link to this Item
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/45361
    Related Resources
    Link to Article in PubMed
    Collections
    UMass Chan Faculty and Researcher Publications

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Lamar Soutter Library, UMass Chan Medical School | 55 Lake Avenue North | Worcester, MA 01655 USA
    Quick Guide | escholarship@umassmed.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.