Illustrating the importance of expert testimony in establishing a factual basis for private nuisance claims and damages in tort actions, a Pennsylvania federal judge vacated a $4.24 million jury verdict and granted a new...more
DC High Court Adopts Daubert Approach to Expert Testimony -
In a direct victory for mobile phone manufacturers and service providers, and with implications for any other case involving expert testimony in the District of...more
12/12/2016
/ Admissibility ,
Contamination ,
Daubert Standards ,
Drinking Water ,
Evidence ,
Expert Testimony ,
Manufacturers ,
Mobile Devices ,
Preemption ,
Take-Home Exposure ,
Toxic Exposure
In an immediate victory for mobile phone manufacturers and service providers, and with implications for any other case involving expert testimony in the District of Columbia, the District of Columbia’s highest court abandoned...more
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
Issuing an opinion that could lower the bar for proving toxic tort causation, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that direct expert testimony may not be necessary to prove causation in a toxic tort case and that a plaintiff...more