Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Max Kennerly
863 followers -
Personal injury lawyer who blogs and writes books about the law. Not shy about being a trial lawyer.
Personal injury lawyer who blogs and writes books about the law. Not shy about being a trial lawyer.

863 followers
About
Communities and Collections
View all
Posts

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Today we’re going to review the state of the art, as it were, of Daubert in product liability cases by examining the four most recent published Court of Appeals opinions. All of these cases have one thing in common: the defendants framed Daubert as a matter of pseudoscientific absolutes, and the Courts of Appeals rejected the defendants at every turn. In the cases that follow, defendants argued that any difference between a test and an accident renders the test unreliable, that plaintiffs cannot go to a jury without statistically significant evidence, that opinions developed in litigation are inherently unreliable, that a doctor’s differential diagnosis is an unacceptable scientific methodology, that plaintiffs’ experts must completely eliminate all potential alternative causes, and that case studies are scientifically irrelevant—and the appellate courts rejected each and every one of those arguments.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Wait while more posts are being loaded