Showing results 1-1 of 1.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"Here, however, the primary question can properly be formulated as whether it is methodologically sound to draw an inference that a drug causes human birth defects from chemical structure, in vivo animal studies, and in vitro studies, when epidemiological evidence is to the contrary."

  Bourne ex rel. Bourne v. EI DuPont De Nemours - 4th Circuit

Decided: 3/29/2002

The second prong of the Daubert analysis focuses on whether the expert's testimony will be helpful to the trier of fact in deciding a fact in issue. ... It appearing that the opinions proffered by Drs. Howard and Tackett meet neither the requisite standards of reliability or relevance under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, as set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993) and its progeny, the court concludes that their testimony must be excluded.

Cited 13 times