The following excerpt is from Yorktown Medical Laboratory, Inc. v. Perales, 948 F.2d 84 (2nd Cir. 1991):
7 See Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335, 96 S.Ct. 893, 903, 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). Mathews prescribed a three-prong analysis and balancing of (1) the private interest affected; (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation of that interest; and (3) the government interest. As applied to extrapolation from a random sample, if an opportunity is provided to rebut the findings with respect to the initial sample, then the risk of erroneous deprivation approaches zero. See generally Friendly, Some Kind of Hearing, 123 U.Pa.L.Rev. 1267, 1295-1304 (1975).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.