首页> 外文期刊>Health Physics: Official Journal of the Health Physics Society >Pre-litigation strategies--gathering and preserving documentary evidence.
【24h】

Pre-litigation strategies--gathering and preserving documentary evidence.

机译:诉讼前策略-收集和保存书面证据。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Radiation injury claims may arise under various legal theories. In addition, plaintiffs may advance such claims within different jurisdictional venues, such as federal and state courts and workers' compensation boards. Irrespective of the jurisdiction or the legal theory underlying the claim, one element remains common to these claims--the quality and quantity of the evidence. While many different pieces of evidence may be needed to litigate a radiation injury claim, the most important evidence for the investigating health physicist is that which establishes the nature and extent of radiation exposure. Most radiation injury claims are associated with late radiation injury, often an allegation of radiation-induced cancer. Because radiation-induced cancers have a long latency period, claims may not arise for years, or even decades, after exposure. Therefore, the immediate challenge to the health physicist, who investigates an exposure, is to avoid the temptation of a "wait and see" approach to gathering evidence. Not only may evidence be short-lived in nature, but with the passage of time memories grow dim and witnesses may become unavailable. Prompt and thorough gathering of pertinent evidence likely will be a determining factor in the outcome of any radiation injury claim. Although ensuring the availability of all pertinent evidence is the key role of the investigating health physicist, he or she also can help to ensure that the evidence does not inadvertently become inadmissible in a court of law, for example, under the hearsay rule. To ensure that the necessary evidence is available in admissible form, the task of gathering evidence should be systematically approached using a pre-established process that reflects a basic understanding of the rules of evidence. Such a process is discussed here.
机译:辐射伤害索赔可能会根据各种法律理论提出。此外,原告可以在不同的司法管辖区(例如联邦法院和州法院以及工人赔偿委员会)提出此类索赔。不管索赔所依据的管辖权或法律理论如何,这些索赔仍然有一个共同点-证据的质量和数量。虽然可能需要许多不同的证据来对辐射损伤索赔进行诉讼,但对于调查健康物理学家而言,最重要的证据是确定辐射暴露的性质和程度的证据。大多数辐射伤害索赔都与晚期辐射伤害有关,通常是对辐射诱发癌症的指称。由于放射线致癌的潜伏期长,因此在暴露后数年甚至数十年内可能不会提出索赔。因此,调查暴露的健康物理学家面临的直接挑战是避免诱惑“等待”收集证据。证据不仅在自然界中是短暂的,而且随着时间的流逝,记忆变得暗淡,目击者可能变得不可用。及时而彻底地收集有关证据可能是任何放射伤害索赔结果的决定因素。尽管确保所有相关证据的可用性是调查健康物理学家的关键角色,但他或她还可以帮助确保证据不会在法庭上无意间变得不可接受,例如,根据传闻规则。为了确保以可接受的形式提供必要的证据,应该使用预先建立的过程来系统地处理收集证据的任务,该过程应反映出对证据规则的基本理解。这里讨论这样的过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号