Showing results 1-2 of 2.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"In Daubert, the Supreme Court held district judges must act as gatekeepers in admitting expert testimony, thereby ensuring that such evidence is both relevant and reliable."

  Hollander v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp. - 10th Circuit

Decided: 3/21/2000

The plaintiffs' evidence of causation fails the test for scientific reliability set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), the defendant contends, because their experts admit their causal hypotheses have not been tested and validated using the scientific method and they do not rule out other causes of Mrs. Hollander's stroke. ... "Under Daubert, when faced with a proffer of expert scientific testimony, a district court `must determine at the outset, pursuant to [Fed.R.Evid.] 104(a), whether the expert is proposing to testify to (1) scientific knowledge that (2) will assist the trier of fact to understand or determine a fact in issue.'"

Cited 14 times

  Samarah v. Danek Med., Inc. - 10th Circuit

Decided: 8/26/1999

1203*1203 Despite the large amount of expert witness opinion testimony and documentation attached to plaintiff's papers, the court concludes that plaintiff has provided inadequate evidence to support his defective product claim under Kansas law. ... In response, plaintiff offers the expert testimony of Drs. Alexander, Kimmel, Strom, and Welford to support his theory that the TSRH construct designed, manufactured, and sold by defendants was defective.

Cited 6 times