The Advisory Committee on Civil Rules of Federal Judicial Conference recently approved several amendments to Fed. R. Evid. 702 intended to quash lackadaisical and flaccid Daubert gatekeeping.
Below is the amended text of the rule, with deletions in brackets and
Product Perspective: Complex Tort & Product Law
Blog Authors
Latest from Product Perspective: Complex Tort & Product Law
General jurisdiction by consent continues to divide as the Supreme Court takes on Mallory.
Mallory v. Norfolk S. R.R. Co., Civ. A. No. 3 EAP 2021, Slip. Op. J-49-2021 (Pa. Dec. 22, 2021) may be one of the most cited decisions in Pennsylvania state courts these days, as defendants file an array of motions…
If Only All Asbestos Cases Were Pending in New York… Nemeth v. Brenntag North America
New York’s Court of Appeals recently reversed a $16,500,000 asbestos jury verdict in a case brought by decedent Florence Nemeth and her husband, who alleged that Mrs. Nemeth’s cancer was caused by her use of Desert Flower Talcum Powder. In…
No Decision on Genetic Testing Dispute in Asbestos Case in Alameda County, California
An Alameda County Judge set a hearing on a motion for protective order in a pending asbestos case in which the plaintiffs sought to prevent the defendants of unapproved genetic testing. In the case of John C. Lohmann and Suzanne…
Federal Court Tosses Fifteen-Year-Old Lead Paint Personal Injury Lawsuit
On March 2, 2022, a Wisconsin federal judge dismissed Burton v. Am. Cyanamid Co., No. 07-C-0303, 2022 WL 623895 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 2, 2022), a lingering fifteen-year personal injury litigation against lead-based paint manufacturers The Sherwin-Williams Co., E.I. DuPont de…
The Impact of Droz on Evidentiary Standards in Delaware
On March 28, 2022, the Supreme Court of Delaware settled a 15-year battle between asbestos plaintiffs and defendants by affirming the burden-shifting framework provided in a 2006 Superior Court decision This decision affirms once and for all that where a…
The Sixth Circuit Tosses the Specific Defect Requirement under Tennessee Law
By Jonah Hall & Magda Patitsas
Under the Tennessee Products Liability Act, plaintiffs used to be required to identify a specific defect or condition that made the product unreasonably dangerous and proximately caused the alleged injuries. But in Hill v. Kia Motors America, Inc., et al.,…
Submarine Manufacturer Successfully Dives into Federal Waters with Effective Removal of Asbestos Case in the First Circuit
Recently, in Moore v. Elec. Boat Corp., No. 21-1566, 2022 WL 278535 (1st Cir. Jan. 31, 2022), a government contractor-defendant successfully appealed remand based on 28 U.S.C. § 1442, the so-called Federal Officer Removal Statute.
Moore serves as a reminder – especially…
Mallory enforced by Philadelphia Court – There Is No General Jurisdiction Based on Registration to Do Business
We previously blogged on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Mallory v. Norfolk S. R.R. Co., Civ. A. No. 3 EAP 2021, Slip. Op. J-49-2021 (Pa. Dec. 22, 2021), which put an end to general jurisdiction based solely on registration…
Cumulative Exposure Theories by Any Other Name Would Still Be Excluded: Illinois Court Requires Evidence of Length and Amount of Asbestos Exposure
Under the now widely-adopted Daubert standard, courts evaluate expert testimony based on the principles and methodology underlying the expert witness’s opinion. Admissibility of expert testimony is not governed by whether the factual underpinnings of the opinion are sound, or the…