Toxic torts science, law, and the possibility of justice Carl F. Cranor.
Detalles de publicación: Cambridge New York Cambridge University Press 2006.Descripción: xvi, 398 p. 24 cmISBN:- 0521861829 (hardback : alk. paper)
- 9780521861823 (hardback : alk. paper)
- Toxic torts -- United States
- Liability, Legal -- United States
- Environmental Pollution -- legislation & jurisprudence -- United States
- Environmental Exposure -- legislation & jurisprudence -- United States
- Produits chimiques -- Droit -- États-Unis
- Substances dangereuses -- Droit -- États-Unis
- Responsabilité pour dommages causés par les substances dangereuses -- États-Unis
- Chemicals -- Law and legislation -- United States
- Hazardous Substances -- Law and legislation -- United States
- 346.7303/8 22
- KF 1299 .H39 C73 2006
| Imagen de cubierta | Tipo de ítem | Biblioteca actual | Biblioteca de origen | Colección | Ubicación en estantería | Signatura topográfica | Materiales especificados | Info Vol | URL | Copia número | Estado | Notas | Fecha de vencimiento | Código de barras | Reserva de ítems | Prioridad de la cola de reserva de ejemplar | Reservas para cursos | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Libro | Biblioteca de Derecho Mons. Fremiot Torres Oliver Colección General biblioteca derecho | KF 1299 .H39 C73 2006 (Navegar estantería(Abre debajo)) | Disponible | 70000000833330 |
Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:
The relationship between science, law and justice has become a pressing issue with US Supreme Court decisions beginning with Daubert v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceutical. How courts review scientific testimony and its foundation before trial can substantially affect the possibility of justice for persons wrongfully injured by exposure to toxic substances. If courts do not review scientific testimony, they will deny one of the parties the possibility of justice. Even if courts review evidence well, the fact and perception of greater judicial scrutiny increases litigation costs and attorney screening of clients. Mistaken review of scientific evidence can decrease citizen access to the law, increase unfortunate incentives for firms not to test their products, lower deterrence for wrongful conduct and harmful products, and decrease the possibility of justice for citizens injured by toxic substances. This book introduces these issues, reveals the relationships that pose problems, and shows how justice can be denied.
Includes bibliographical references ( p. 371-389) and index.
The veil of science over tort law policy -- Legal background -- Institutional concerns about the Supreme Court's triology -- Studies of toxicity and scientific reasoning -- Excellent evidence makes bad law : pragmatic barriers to the discovery of harm and fair admissibility decisions -- Science and law in conflict -- Enhancing the possibility of justice under Daubert -- Is Daubert the solution?
Tabla de contenidos provista por Syndetics
- 1 The veil of science over Tort Law policy
- 2 Legal background
- 3 Institutional concerns about the Supreme Court's triology
- 4 The science of toxicity and reasoning about causation
- 5 Excellent evidence makes bad law: pragmatic barriers to the discovery of harm and fair admissibility decisions
- 6 Science and law in conflict
- 7 Improving legal protections under Daubert; Is Daubert the solution?
- Bibliography