News & Analysis as of

Expert Testimony Causation Evidence

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Fifth Circuit Clouds Threshold Dose Analysis in Ruffin v. BP

Plaintiffs in toxic tort cases must prove both general and specific causation, generally through the testimony of experts. Experts must establish that a specific chemical exposure can (and did) cause the specific injury at...more

Bennett Jones LLP

British Columbia Grapples With Evidentiary Issues and the Requirement for a Workable Methodology

Bennett Jones LLP on

The evidentiary burden on plaintiffs to have a case certified­—i.e., the “some basis in fact” standard—has been described as a “low bar” in countless cases. Plaintiffs cite the “low bar” in trying to certify their cases, and...more

White and Williams LLP

New Jersey Court Pumps the Brakes on Product Liability Lawsuit

White and Williams LLP on

In Wang v. Maserati N. Am., Inc., C.A. No. 23-2402, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61446, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (District Court) considered the admissibility of the opinions of plaintiffs’...more

Goldberg Segalla

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Granted Based on Expert Preclusion

Goldberg Segalla on

Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York - Plaintiff Scott Keller alleged that he was exposed to asbestos during his employment on ExxonMobil Oil Company vessels and that he developed...more

ArentFox Schiff

US District Court to Examine Link Between PFAS and Cancer

ArentFox Schiff on

Amidst mounting per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) regulation and litigation, the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) judge overseeing the federal litigation related to firefighting foam has scheduled a “Science Day.”...more

Blank Rome LLP

New Jersey Appellate Division Makes Clear Experts Must Demonstrate a Scientifically Recognized Methodology

Blank Rome LLP on

Recently, the New Jersey Appellate Division, in Dorrell v. Woodruff Energy, Inc., vacated a 2018 judgment against Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (“Chevron”) that had found Chevron liable for gasoline contamination. More specifically,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Foundation, Not Façade — The Fifth Circuit Affirms the Proper Basis Requirement for Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Newsome v....

In a toxic tort case, plaintiffs must establish general causation. If a substance is incapable of causing the type of injury plaintiff claims, then it certainly didn’t cause theirs. Under Texas law, toxic tort plaintiffs must...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Washington Court Finds No Take-Home Exposure in Asbestos Bench Trial

Husch Blackwell LLP on

In Perkins v. United States, Plaintiff Tristan Perkins sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) for her mother Geraldine Perkins’ (“Decedent”) alleged wrongful death due to asbestos exposure. Alleging...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

To Depose or Not to Depose: When Challenging Opposing Nonretained Experts Becomes Challenging

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) requires parties to disclose the opinions of experts who may present evidence at trial. If the disclosures are inadequate, Rule 37(c) requires exclusion of the opinions “unless the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Plaintiff’s Half-Baked Attempt to Prove Defect and Causation With Photographs of Moldy Bread Shows the Knead for Expert Testimony

A picture may be worth a thousand words, but that doesn’t make the camera an expert witness. Product liability actions usually require expert testimony to prove defect and causation. Pictures, like other documents, can be...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

CDF Labor Law LLP

A New and Challenging Obstacle for California Employers’ Use of Experts in State Courts

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Employers litigating cases in California courts face many obstacles. Summary judgment has become increasingly difficult for employers. Criminal cases take precedent and often cause trial postponements, resulting in civil...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

On July 17, 2023, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill (SB) No. 652, adding Section 801.1 to the California Evidence Code. This section provides additional requirements for expert opinions relating to medical...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

National Mass Torts: 2022 Year in Review

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

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

Plaintiff Shoots an Airball Against Nike in Design Defect Case

ase In the wake of March Madness, it is only appropriate to call attention to an opinion laced with pithy basketball puns. In Nachimovsky v. Nike, Inc. et al., 2022 WL 943421 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2022), Plaintiff injured his...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

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Defendants Secure Rare Summary Judgment in Zoloft MDL

In an unusual turn of events, U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe recently granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to over 300 cases in the Zoloft MDL. These cases were consolidated in 2012 and involved allegations...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

Louisiana Federal Court Rejects Expert Testimony Tying Gasoline to AML

Underscoring the importance of the distinction between a product and its component parts, a federal court in Louisiana refused to allow expert testimony that exposure to gasoline caused acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”) in a...more

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC

Toxic Tort and Environmental Litigation: Court of Appeals Revisits and Clarifies Causation Requirements for Expert Opinions

Causation is the crux of any toxic tort litigation. The Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Cornell v. 360 West 51st Street Realty, LLC, No. 16 (N.Y. Mar. 27, 2014) underscores that principle and revisits the causation...more

25 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