STARLING

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Daubert et ux. v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1993)
  …ioners’ evidence provided an insufficient foundation to allow admission of expert testimony that Bendectin caused their injuries and, accordingly, that petitioners could not satisfy their burden of proving causation at trial. We granted certiorari, 506 U. S. 914 (1992), in light of sharp divisions among the courts regarding the proper standard for the admission of expert testimony. Compare, e. g., United States v. Shorter, 257 U. S. App. D. C. 358, 363-364, 809 F. 2d 54, 59-60 (applying the “general accepta…
• Good Samaritan Hosp. v. Shalala, 508 U.S. 402 (U.S. 1993)
  …h merely purport to be estimates of actual costs) are reconciled with the postaudit amounts determined at year’s end to be owed under the methods determining allowable costs.6 We granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the Courts of Appeals.7 506 U. S. 914 (1992). II A The starting point in interpreting a statute is its language, for “[i]f the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter.” Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 842 (1984).…
• Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429 (U.S. 1993)
  …als held that actions within the scope of a reporter’s authority are absolutely immune. 950 F. 2d, at 1475-1476. Some Circuits have held that court reporters are protected only by qualified immunity.3 We granted certiorari to resolve this conflict. 506 U. S. 914 (1992). II The proponent of a claim to absolute immunity bears the burden of establishing the justification for such immunity.4 In determining which officials perform functions that might justify a full exemption from liability, “we have undertake…