Hebbard v. United Health Services Hospitals, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that \[c]linical errors [committed during DNA profiling] are far more likely to cause an inconclusive or no match result than a false positive.\
• concluding that third prong in Castro should go to weight of evidence, not its admissibility
• finding FBI's method for conducting RFLP analysis and declaring match generally accepted, but population frequency estimate admissible only if most conservative method used
• there is a “sharp disagreement within the scientific community on the manner in which probability estimates are derived”
• there is a \sharp disagreement within the scientific community on the manner in which probability estimates are derived\
• rather than 1 in 67,000,000 as claimed by the People

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).