The other day we saw the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision in Williams v. Eight Judicial District Court, ___ P.3d ___, 2011 WL 3206963 (Nev. July 28, 2011). One of the two “novel” questions the court decided in Williams is “whether defense expert testimony offering alternative causation theories must meet the ‘reasonable degree of medical probability’ standard” as plaintiff-side experts. Id. at *1. The Nevada court unanimously held that, because defendants don’t have the burden of proof, defense experts’ opinions don’t have to meet that standard, because that would effectively be shifting the burden of proof to the defendant...
Please see full publication below for more information.