Showing results 1-5 of 5.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"A sufficiency inquiry, which asks whether the collective weight of a litigant's evidence is adequate to present a jury question, lies further down the litigational road."

  Hall v. Baxter Healthcare Corp. - 9th Circuit

Decided: 12/18/1996

There is no doubt but that Dr. Swan has impressive credentials, as Justice Blackmun himself recognized in Daubert I, 509 U.S. at 583 n. 2, 113 S.Ct. at 2792 n. 2 (noting that Dr. Swan has "a master's degree in biostatics from Columbia University and a doctorate in statistics from the University of California at Berkeley, is chief of the section of the California Department of Health and Sciences that determines causes of birth defects, and has served as a consultant to the World Health Organization, the Food and Drug Administration, and the National Institutes of Health.") However, as Judge Weinstein noted in the Agent Orange litigation, the jury should "not be permitted to be misled by the glitter of an expert's accomplishments outside the courtroom" if the expert opinion is based on "untrustworthy" data or is otherwise not reliable.[43] ... As mentioned earlier, with respect to the first listed factor, whether the expert's theory or method is generally accepted, the Ninth Circuit explained in Daubert II that in certain circumstances it may be sufficient if a minority in the scientific community accepts the methods employed, but only if the proponent demonstrates in "some objectively verifiable way that the expert has both chosen a reliable scientific method and followed it faithfully."

Cited 41 times

  Stevenson v. EI DuPont De Nemours & Co. - 5th Circuit

Decided: 4/3/2003

The court quoted the following passage from Daubert to illustrate the proper method of attacking questionable-but-admissible expert evidence: "`[v]igorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof'" are the traditional and appropriate means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence. ... Further, the court found that Daubert did not change the traditional role of a sufficiency inquiry, but only expanded the trial court's role regarding the admissibility of expert evidence.

Cited 3 times
Soil Chemical elements Dietary minerals Occupational safety and health 

  Adams v. Indiana Bell Telephone Co., Inc. - 7th Circuit

Decided: 1/23/1998

The defendants have challenged the admissibility of a report and testimony from Dr. Richard Wertheimer ("Wertheimer"), a labor economist that plaintiffs plan to offer as an expert witness, under the Daubert standards. ... Under the Daubert framework, the court must assess whether the expert is qualified and will testify to reliable scientific knowledge that is helpful to the trier of fact.

Cited 1 times

  Cook v. Rockwell Intern. Corp. - 10th Circuit

Decided: 12/7/2008

For this litigation, Ms. Smart authored a 14-page expert report in which she opined that Rocky Flats has not had a negative effect on the value of the named Plaintiffs' individual properties or the value of other residential properties in northeast Jefferson County. App. to Pls.' Daubert Mot. (Doc. 1352), Ex. 12 [hereinafter "Smart Report"] at 9, 14. ... My review of the parties' motions to exclude expert testimony is governed by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), and its progeny.

Cited 0 times

  Cook v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION - 10th Circuit

Decided: 12/7/2006

For this litigation, Ms. Smart authored a 14-page expert report in which she opined that Rocky Flats has not had a negative effect on the value of the named Plaintiffs' individual properties or the value of other residential properties in northeast Jefferson County. App. to Pls.' Daubert Mot. (Doc. 1352), Ex. 12 [hereinafter "Smart Report"] at 9, 14. ... My review of the parties' motions to exclude expert testimony is governed by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and its progeny.

Cited 0 times