Plaintiff HT Experts Excluded


We can’t provide any commentary or analysis, because of our firm’s involvement in the litigation. But we thought our readers would benefit from knowing about three recent opinions excluding certain plaintiff experts in an HT case.

Just the holdings, then:

Opinion #1: Hines v. Wyeth, 2011 WL 2680814 (S.D.W. Va. July 8, 2011). Experts: Drs. Wayne Tilley and Donald Austin. Opinions: Oral micronized progesterone as an alternative safer design. Result: Excluded. Reasons: Reliance on statistically insignificant evidence. Reliance on animal studies.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dechert LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Dechert LLP on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.