News & Analysis as of

Causation Expert Testimony Daubert Standards

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Plaintiffs’ Second Bite at the General Causation Apple Fares No Better Than the First in Acetaminophen MDL

In December 2023, back when the ink was still drying on the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Southern District of New York excluded all five general causation experts proffered by plaintiffs in the In re...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

California Supreme Court Walks Middle Ground on Warnings Causation but Reaffirms Learned Intermediary Doctrine in Himes

As we reported in April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified a question on California’s Learned Intermediary Doctrine in Himes v. Somatics, LLC, 2022 WL 989469 (9th Cir. Apr. 1, 2022). The...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Peer Review Can’t Save “Junk Science” from FRE 702 Judicial Gatekeeping – In re: Roundup Court Excludes Expert Whose Opinions Had...

When tasked with assessing the admissibility of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, courts often cite the so-called Daubert factors as criteria that guide the inquiry. Among those factors is “whether the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Amended FRE 702 Arrives in MDL Practice: S.D.N.Y. Excludes Plaintiffs’ Experts in Acetaminophen MDL

The Committee Notes to the newly implemented amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 make clear that the “[j]udicial gatekeeping” of expert evidence is “essential.” Federal courts in New York have played an important role...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

What Dose Makes the Poison? Where Expert Cannot Say, Eleventh Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment

A central tenet of toxicology is that “the dose makes the poison.” Every chemical is toxic if enough of it is consumed, and every chemical has some dose – even if miniscule – at which it poses no significant risk. A chemical...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Texas Supreme Court Refocuses on Causation and Affirms Summary Judgment in Herbicide Drift Case

The question of whether a particular application of herbicide on one property caused damage on another’s property requires expert testimony. When a plaintiff claims that herbicide drift caused reduced crop yields, it is not...more

Harris Beach PLLC

National Mass Torts: 2022 Year in Review

Harris Beach PLLC on

Harris Beach attorneys Abbie Eliasberg Fuchs, Bradley M. Wanner and Daniel R. Strecker review and analyze key judicial holdings and legal developments in New York, the federal arena and across the country that have affected...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Zantac Rule 702 Order: TLBR (Too Long, But Read)

On opening an opinion, lawyers habitually roll their eyes when they see a table of contents. Even more so when they learn the opinion is over 300 pages. The MDL order granting defense motions to exclude experts and for...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Experts’ Disagreement with Medical Literature Leads to Exclusion

Peer-reviewed literature can be a powerful tool in attacking an opposing expert’s opinions. A solid, on-point article can do more than merely satisfy several of the so-called Daubert factors for assessing reliability – by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Ipse Dixit – It’s Not Just for Analytical Gaps Anymore

There are few legal phrases more fun to say than “ipse dixit.” The phrase is most commonly used in motions to exclude experts who base their opinions on nothing more than their own say so...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Pathologist Stopped Short of Offering Could-Have, Should-Have Opinions

In personal injury and wrongful death cases, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving medical causation, which almost universally requires testimony from a competent expert.  Some plaintiffs offer testimony from forensic...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Ninth Circuit Affirms Exclusion of Expert and Resulting Summary Judgment in In re: Incretin-Based Therapies MDL

Early last year, the In re: Incretin-Based Therapies MDL court held that the plaintiffs’ warnings claims were preempted, excluded plaintiffs’ general causation experts, and granted summary judgment to all defendants on dual...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Let Me Google That for You: A Recent Central District of Illinois Opinion Highlights the Limits of Googling by Expert Witnesses...

While we all rely on Google or other internet search engines to find and absorb information quickly these days, a recent decision in the Central District of Illinois highlights the problems for expert witnesses relying on...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Rule 702 Toolbox: How Do You Solve a Problem Like the Ninth Circuit?

There has been much discussion recently about how Rule 702 is in need of a tune-up to better guide district courts’ gatekeeping. More about that soon. But a case now pending before the Supreme Court, Monsanto Company v....more

Butler Snow LLP

Correlation Equals Causation? Potential Hurdles for Defendants in Daubert Motions against Causation Experts.

Butler Snow LLP on

Kovach v. Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co., No. 3:18-CV-02826-JGC, 2021 WL 3774900 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 25, 2021) encourages defense attorneys to challenge experts with tactics other than Daubert, as the court avoided excluding...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Growing Pains: The Story Behind Florida’s Daubert Arc – Part 2

The Aftermath of Marsh - When the Marsh case was decided in 2007 its broad interpretation of the “pure opinion exception” and narrow vision of the role of Frye took Florida expert evidence admissibility law well out of the...more

Butler Snow LLP

Pro Te: Solutio – Vol. 11, No. 4

Butler Snow LLP on

Fall has descended upon us, along with that nip in the air and the aroma of pumpkin spice. All of these herald our latest edition of Pro Te: Solutio, which contains three fascinating articles on topics of current interest in...more

Carlton Fields

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

Carlton Fields on

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

Carlton Fields

Causation Experts Properly Excluded Where The “Leap From Data To Opinion Was Too Great”

Carlton Fields on

In Hughes v. Kia Motors Corp., No. 13-10922, the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the district court’s exclusion of the plaintiff’s expert witness in a motor vehicle product liability case. Allene Hughes, the plaintiff’s...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

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