Supreme Court

In 1971 the OSHA standard for benzene (20 CFR, Part 1910.0000) adopted a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10 ppm benzene measured as an 8-h TWA. In October of 1976 NIOSH updated its earlier criteria document on benzene and recommended that OSHA lower the benzene exposure standard from 10 to 1 ppm. This proposed implementation was blocked by the United States Supreme Court iu 1980 on the basis of iusufficient evidence linking benzene to cancer deaths. By the mid-1980s convincing evidence of the carciuogenicity of benzene appeared through animal studies which justified reconsideration of the 1 ppm PEL (130). 

In 1958 the Supreme Court ruled that under the 1938 law, the FDA did not have the authority to estabHsh limits of use for colorants and that they were obligated to decertify or deHst a color if any quantity of it caused harm even though lesser amounts were perfectiy safe (19). The FDA s hands were tied (20). A review of the remaining colors was started and soon several more were deHsted, including FD C YeUow Nos. 1—4. It became obvious that the existing law on certifiable colors was unworkable. 

U.S. Supreme Court. 358 U.S. 153, Dec. 15, 1958. The court ruling that established the harmless per se principle that a color additive had to be harmless regardless of the quantity used. 

Similarly, copyright does not protect research. According to the Supreme Court, copyright protects creativity, not effort, no matter how significant that effort is (4). 

The fair use doctrine has given rise to voluminous case law and commentary. Recent Supreme Court decisions have included Hamper <22 ... 

Agriculturists and chemical officials scorned Carson s jeremiad and argued that she misrepresented the evidence, while conseiwationists such as Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas praised her for... 

The second major federal regulatoiy event was a Supreme Court decision in 1954 which resulted in the imposition of wellhead price regulation of gas sold in interstate commerce. 

U.S. Supreme Court breaks Standard Oil monopoly into thirty-four companies. 

The U.S. Supreme Court rtil es that states have the authority under the Clean Water Act to establish minimum streamflows at hydro projects. The ruling gives states more authority in hydro licensing and relicensing decisions. 

The initial decision—often called the VICOM decision after the applicant for the patent—was followed by further decisions of the Boards of Appeal that opened the way for the patenting of inventions implemented by means of computers. The reasoning behind these decisions has often been adopted by courts in other countries (not only in Europe, but elsewhere). The German Supreme Court, for example, has explicitly stated that the application of computers in chemistry or biology is acceptable patentable subject matter [14]. 

But as philosophers have remarked and courts have ruled, the right to privacy is not absolute. In fact, the place and importance of the right to privacy are still being explored, as the Supreme Court decisions in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) demonstrate. As a result, decisions regarding the right to privacy are very often driven by context. Such may be the case with situations involving computer use, the right to privacy, and pharmaceutical research. 

Supreme Court of the United States (1962). Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660. Appeal from the appellate department, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, No. 554. 

Supreme Court of Canada (2004). Percy Schmeiser and Schmeiser Enterprises Ltd v. Monsanto Canada Inc and Monsanto Company. File no. 29437. January 20, 2004 May 21. Ottawa, Canada. 

The Federal Circuit then briefly summarized the utility requirement. To have utility, inventions must have "substantial utility" and "specific benefit existing in currently available form [6]." The utility requirement "prevents mere ideas from being patented" and also "prevents the patenting of a mere research proposal. .. [6]." Quoting a famous Supreme Court patent case, the court emphasized that "a patent is not a hunting license. It is not a reward for search, but compensation for its successful conclusion [7]."... 

She reported that a Judge Curtis Shake of Vincennes, Indiana, was coming to Numberg. He had been a chief justice of the Indiana supreme court and chairman of one of Indiana s Democratic conventions. 

The President Mr. Prosecutor, is it your theory that this final judgment of the German Supreme Court establishes the relationship between Dynamit A.G. and Farben ... 

The more expansive view of informed consent was used by the California Supreme Court in Moore v. Regents of the University of California in 1990... 

This determination requires an examination of both an old and a new line of cases. In the new line of cases, plaintiffs have argued—in the therapeutic context—that health care providers have a duty to provide comparative data about the effectiveness not only of various treatment alternatives, but also about the qualifications, competence, and experience of the provider. In the one case in which plaintiffs have so far succeeded in surviving a motion to dismiss, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that a neurosurgeon had a duty to disclose his level of experience with a procedure and the morbidity and mortality differences between himself and more experienced neurosurgeons (Johnson v. Kokemoor, 1996). The Wisconsin court s ruling has been labeled the "second revolution" of the informed consent doctrine (Twerski and Cohen, 1999 Ketler, 2001). 

In Regents of University of California v. Bakke, the famous Supreme Court decision on affirmative action in education, the state gave as one justification for racial preferences for minorities in medical school the need to improve minority health care (Regents of University of California v. Bakke, 1978). No justice of the United States Supreme Court bought that argument, for it was... 

The following passage discusses the Supreme Court s power of judicial review, a practice first invoked in the historical 1803 Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison. 

Since the 1960s there has been a sea change in university admissions. Key Supreme Court decisions and federal laws made equal opportunity the law of the land, and many institutions of higher learning adopted policies of affirmative action. The term affirmative action was first used in the 1960s to describe the active recruitment and pro-... 

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency must base Clean Air Act regulations on science, not costs, and has remanded the agency s ozone standard, finding its interpretation of that part of the statute faulty and unreasonable. Responses from tyre industry spokespersons are discussed, with particular reference to compliance costs. 

---