And berhardt v richardsonmerrell the court ruled that

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: fferent species” (Agent Orange Produce Liability). Chronic Toxicity Studies determine cancer risk, but high levels used would rarely, if ever, be found in humans, and courts are accordingly skeptical of CTS information. IN lynch v. Merrell National Labs, the court ruled: “There is no evidence that Lynch was exposed to the types of animal studies…are therefore inadmissible in opinion nor create a genuine issue for trial.” In Richardson v. Richardson-Merrell Inc. and Berhardt v. RichardsonMerrell the court ruled that extrapolating animal data to explain human effects was too theoretical to meet the requirements of legal proof. Abstract courtesy of the Humane Education network (H.E.N) Animals in Laboratories Information Service (ALIS) database. For more information, kindly visit http://www.hennet.org Kellert, Stephen R. and Alan R. Felthous Childhood Cruelty toward Animals among Criminals and Noncriminals HUMAN RELATIONS, Vol. 38, issue 12, p. 1113-1129 (1985) “This paper examines the relationship between childhood cruelty toward animals and aggressive behavior among criminals and noncriminals in adulthood. “Data...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online