Showing results 1-10 of 32.


  In re Paoli RR Yard PCB Litigation - 3rd Circuit

Decided: 8/31/1994
Amended: 10/17/1994
District Court Decision: Excluded In Part
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Daubert suggests several factors that a district court should take into account in evaluating whether a particular scientific methodology is reliable (i.e. scientifically valid), including the testability of the expert's hypothesis ("whether it can be (and has been) tested"), Daubert, ___ U.S. at ____, 113 S.Ct. at 2796, whether the methodology has been subjected to peer review and publication, the frequency by which the methodology leads to erroneous results, the existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operation, and whether the methodology has been generally accepted in the scientific community.[7] ... Primarily, however, we must consider the voluminous record concerning expert opinion and, applying Fed.R.Evid. 702 and the standards enunciated by the Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., ___ U.S. ____, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), decide whether the district court erred in again excluding the opinions of plaintiffs' experts in connection with its summary judgment determination.

Cited 908 times
Medical terminology Medical specialties Proteomics Respiratory diseases Industrial occupations 

  Moore v. Ashland Chemical Inc. - 5th Circuit

Decided: 8/14/1998
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

The majority en banc opinion (1) conflicts with the view of other circuits, a state court of last resort, and scholarly commentary, in 280*280 holding that (a) a clinical medical expert cannot express an opinion as to a causal relationship between a chemical compound and a plaintiff's disease, although the opinion is based on the sound application of generally accepted clinical medical methodology, unless the causal link is confirmed by hard scientific methodology as per the Daubert factors[1], see Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 593-94, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993); ... For example, the report of the American College of Trial Lawyers on Standards and Procedures For Determining the Admissibility of Expert Evidence After Daubert, 157 F.R.D. 571 (1994) recognizes that the basic Daubert requirement that a trial judge determine whether a proffer of expert testimony is reliable or valid applies to all forms of expert testimony and that the particular expert at issue should have her methodology, i.e. the validity of her opinion, judged by the principles applicable to "that particular field."

Cited 434 times
Respiratory diseases Respiratory therapy Occupational diseases Medical specialties Social sciences 

  Holbrook v. Lykes Bros. SS Co., Inc. - 3rd Circuit

Decided: 3/21/1996
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded, Affirmed

Under Daubert's interpretation of Rule 104(a), a district court facing a proffer of scientific expert testimony must as a preliminary matter assess whether the reasoning or methodology underlying the expert's testimony is scientifically valid. ... The court scheduled a pretrial Daubert hearing at plaintiff's request to determine if the expert testimony regarding radiation exposure as a cause of mesothelioma was admissible.

Cited 199 times
Respiratory diseases Occupational diseases 

  McClain v. Metabolife Intern., Inc. - 11th Circuit

Decided: 3/2/2005
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded

1237*1237 Before trial Metabolife moved to exclude Plaintiffs' experts' testimony on medical causation asserting that Plaintiffs' experts' opinions lacked a reliable foundation for admission under the standards of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). ... This type of proof requires expert testimony, and when a party offers expert testimony and the opposing party raises a Daubert challenge, the trial court must "make certain that an expert, whether basing testimony upon professional studies or personal experience, employs in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field."

Cited 170 times
Occupational diseases Medical terminology Stroke Epidemiology Sympathomimetics 

  Best v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc. - 6th Circuit

Decided: 4/16/2009
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded

We further note that, even without Dr. Moreno's expert testimony, summary judgment might be inappropriate in this case in light of this court's recent decision in Gass v. Marriott Hotel Services, 558 F.3d 419, 434 (6th Cir.2009) (holding that expert testimony was not required to prove the causation element of a negligence case where the plaintiffs were allegedly exposed to pesticides and immediately developed respiratory injuries). ... According to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), a district court's task in assessing evidence proffered under Rule 702 is to determine whether the evidence "both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand."

Cited 121 times
Neurological disorders Medical terminology Human head and neck Medical specialties Chemical safety 

  Tamraz v. Lincoln Elec. Co. - 6th Circuit

Decided: 9/8/2010
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded

The manufacturers here do not challenge the district court's primary Daubert ruling on Parkinson's Disease testimony, In re Welding Fume Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 03-cv-17000, 2005 WL 1868046, at *22-37 (N.D.Ohio Aug. 8, 2005), and so we do not decide whether other experts may testify that manganese exposure causes Parkinson's Disease. ... Jan Beyea & Daniel Berger, Scientific Misconceptions among Daubert Gatekeepers: The Need for Reform of Expert Review Procedures, 64 LAW & CONTEMP.

Cited 101 times
Neurological disorders Extrapyramidal and movement disorders Midbrain Railway occupations Medical terminology 

  Burleson v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice - 5th Circuit

Decided: 12/9/2004
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

On appeal, this Court affirmed, finding the expert testimony unreliable under Daubert because, inter alia, "no epidemiological study has found a statistically significant link between EtO exposure and human brain cancer." ... However, "the factors identified in Daubert may or may not be pertinent in assessing reliability, depending on the nature of the issue, the expert's particular expertise, and the subject of his testimony."

Cited 99 times
Occupational safety and health Radioactivity Medical specialties Disorders causing seizures Occupational diseases 

  Allen v. Pennsylvania Engineering Corp. - 5th Circuit

Decided: 12/31/1996
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Where, as here, no epidemiological study has found a statistically significant link between EtO exposure and human brain cancer; the results of animal studies are inconclusive at best; and there was no evidence of the level of Allen's occupational exposure to EtO, the expert testimony does not exhibit the level of reliability necessary to comport with Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 703, the Supreme Court's Daubert decision,[1] and this court's authorities. ... Although the trial court wrote a cursory opinion on the admissibility of Allen's expert evidence, the parties developed a considerable record, and the court heard oral argument before rendering a decision that the experts' evidence, testimony and opinions did not satisfy the standards set forth in Daubert or relevant authorities of this Court.

Cited 90 times
Disorders causing seizures Occupational safety and health Occupational diseases Carcinogenesis Brain 

  Turner v. Iowa Fire Equipment Company - 8th Circuit

Decided: 9/22/2000
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Most circuits have held that a reliable differential diagnosis satisfies Daubert and provides a valid foundation for admitting an expert opinion. ... Daubert ensures that all expert testimony is scientifically reliable before being submitted to the jury.

Cited 83 times
Occupational diseases Asthma Respiratory diseases Medical terminology English inventions 

  Zuchowicz v. US - 2nd Circuit

Decided: 3/20/1998
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Under Daubert, trial judges are charged with ensuring that expert testimony "both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand." ... McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co., 61 F.3d 1038, 1042 (2d Cir.1995) ("The decision to admit expert testimony is left to the broad discretion of the trial judge and will be overturned only when manifestly erroneous.").

Cited 77 times
Cardiovascular physiology Respiratory diseases Gynaecology Occupational diseases Obstetrics