Daubert Standards

News & Analysis as of

“Not the Stuff of Science”: “Differential Etiology” Causation Opinions Fail Daubert in 7th Circuit Toxic Tort Case

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment in an environmental toxic tort case, holding that the testimony of all three of plaintiffs’ causation experts – James Dahlgren,...more

Central District of California "Discontinues" Much of Plaintiffs' Experts' Testimony in Cymbalta "Discontinuation Symptoms" Case

“I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV” – shorthand for “I am pretending to know what I’m talking about, but I really don’t.” We have blogged frequently about experts inclined to such pretense and about courts’ varying...more

Insights from DRI Class Action Seminar 2015 – Part 1

As I’ve done in past years, this post and the next one will summarize some takeaways I gleaned from this year’s DRI Class Action Seminar. Impact of Dart Cherokee: Nowell Berreth, who argued this case in the Supreme...more

IP Newsflash - July 2015 #3

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Expert Witness’ Flawed Infringement Opinion Supports an Award of Attorneys’ Fees - Defendants Six Flags Theme Parks Inc. sought an award of attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 against...more

Daubert – and a Mechanical Pencil – Doom the Testimony of “Clinical Engineering” Expert

“If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” In the granddaddy of today’s reality TV shows, this buzz-phrase became synonymous with “use your head before you rely on a demonstration.” The plaintiff in Hutson v. Covidien Holdings,...more

Daubert And Dispositive Motions Are Decided

Stark, C. J. Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Certain Opinions of Defendants' Technical Expert Glenn Reinman is denied. Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Opinions and Proposed Testimony of Jeremiah Grant is denied in part and...more

Cybersecurity Coverage Litigation: Learning to Survive After the Second Wave Hits

It’s a familiar pattern. First, new risks inspire legislation and regulations that impose new penalties. Next, insurers and policyholders fight over whether the new liabilities are covered under traditional liability...more

MDL Court Agrees – Tincher Doesn’t Change Pennsylvania Drug/Device Law

Several months ago we responded with some disdain to recent plaintiff-side arguments we had seen claiming that the strict liability decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014), somehow altered...more

Court Declines To Certify Damages Class in Baseball Blackout Suit

On May 14, 2015, the Southern District of New York issued two opinions in Laumann v. Nat’l Hockey League, No. 12-cv-1817, excluding plaintiffs’ damages expert under Daubert and denying plaintiffs’ motion to certify a damages...more

What Exactly Was Excluded? Proffering Expert Opinions to Preserve Daubert/Frye Challenges

Most practitioners would agree that, if the court excludes an expert based on a Daubert challenge—and that is the only expert opining on a subject—then in most instances there should be no need to proffer the expert’s...more

Guest Post - Game of Unknowns: A Daubert Ruling From the Middle District of Florida

Here at the DDL Blog, there are few things we enjoy more than a defense-friendly Daubert ruling – one of those things being, of course, our regular Sunday night HBO date with Game of Thrones. The “Hardhome” episode two...more

More Drake Dreck – Vermont Federal Court Refuses to Overturn Botched Botox Verdict

“We’ve seen this movie before.” That is something people say when they encounter something that seems simultaneously dreadful and predictable. That is how we felt upon reading the latest dismal opinion out of the Drake...more

California District Court Grants Summary Judgment Based on Lack of Evidence Supporting Claims for Asbestos Exposure

A California district court recently granted summary judgment in favor of four defendants on the grounds that plaintiffs had no evidence that a decedent was exposed to asbestos from defendants’ products. (Livingston v. ABB,...more

Daubert In Virginia State Court: Where Do Things Stand Now?

The past few months have seen a flurry of developments as to the extent to which Daubert and its progeny are authoritative in Virginia state court proceedings....more

Judge Endorses Extrapolation Techniques for False Claims Act Whistleblowers

In a lawsuit brought under the False Claims Act ("FCA") a federal district judge in Florida recently rejected a defendant's challenge to a statistical sampling and extrapolation methodology advanced by a qui tam plaintiff's...more

Third Circuit to Plaintiffs’ Bar: Expert Testimony Necessary for Certification Must Satisfy Daubert

Plaintiff purchasers of traditional blood reagents, products that test the compatibility of donor blood with recipients, brought putative class actions claiming that two defendant companies conspired to fix prices in...more

Use of Expert Testimony at Class Certification Stage Addressed By Third Circuit

The Third Circuit recently joined the Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits in holding that, where a Daubert challenge is made to the use of expert testimony in support of class certification, the Daubert challenge must be...more

Third Circuit Remands Class Certification Ruling in Blood Reagents Price-Fixing Case

On Wednesday, April 8, 2015, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a district court’s order certifying a class of direct purchasers of blood reagents in a price-fixing suit against Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Inc. In re...more

Third Circuit Weighs In On Application Of Daubert At Class Certification Stage

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast v. Behrend, 113 S. Ct. 1426 (2013) courts evaluating expert testimony at the class certification stage may not simply accept that testimony at face value. The Supreme Court did...more

New Jersey Casts a Broader Net (Opinion Rule)

It wasn’t too long ago that, down the shore, New Jersey hosted one of the most notorious litigation hellholes in the country. That’s not the case anymore, as the current (2014-15) ATRA Judicial Hellholes report explains in a...more

Federal Court Holds That “Each and Every Exposure” Theory is Inadmissible

The “single fiber” theory, well known to asbestos litigants and practitioners, is an attempt to circumvent “substantial factor” causation requirements, positing that any exposure to asbestos constitutes an underlying cause of...more

Louisiana Federal Court Excludes “Every Exposure” Testimony

Adding to the growing body of case law that rejects the so-called “every exposure” theory, a federal court in Louisiana has excluded specific causation opinions of a plaintiffs’ expert who relied on the theory, finding that...more

Rule 23 Study Agenda – Merits Inquiry

The Advisory Committee has signaled that the merits inquiry is a “back burner” issue for the next Rule 23 amendments. Perhaps they should nudge it towards the front....more

Chicago Federal Court Bars Expert Testimony Espousing the “Any Exposure” Theory

On December 22, 2014, in a pre-trial ruling, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, in Krik v. Crane Co., et al., No. 1:10-cv-07435 (N.D. Ill. December 22, 2014) barred perennial plaintiff’s expert Dr....more

Daubert Motion Denied Where Defendant Had "Salubrious Fodder" for Cross-Examination If Plaintiff's Expert Used Wrong Source Code

Defendant Adobe Systems ("Adobe") filed a Daubert motion seeking to limit the testimony of plaintiff EveryScapes' expert, Dr. Maja Bystrom ("Dr. Bystrom"), for three reasons. First, Adobe sought to exclude the...more

55 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3

"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*

*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.
×