Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Browning v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
528 U.S. 1050
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1999-12-06
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- reviving the contemporaneous objection rule for the penalty phase, as well as guilt phase of a capital trial
- ex-employee returned to restaurant, shot and killed two people, and injured another during course of an armed robbery
- defendant shot and killed two people, and injured two people during the course of an armed robbery
- Johns Hopkins algorithm used; applying test similar to that stated in Daubert and affirming trial court’s ruling of nonadmissibility based on unreliability of polygraphs
- ". . . we hold that we will no longer consider alleged errors occurring in the penalty phase of a capital trial absent a contemporaneous objection."
- contemporaneous objection rule will apply to penalty-phase errors as well as guilt-stage errors in capital cases heard after the date of decision
- “Under the FMLA, the employer’s duties are triggered when the employee provides enough information to put the employer on notice that the employee may be in need of FMLA leave.”
- to determine whether underlying science of expert's testimony is reliable, court will look at several factors, including: (1) publications and peer review of technique; (2) prior application of method to type of evidence involved in case; (3
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Browning v. Liberty Mutual Insurance. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 83 opinions
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.