Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals

(redirected from Daubert factors)
A lawsuit by brought by J. Daubert, who was born with limb-reduction defects, alleging that the cause of his disability was Bendectin, produced by Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals
References in periodicals archive ?
209) The judge used the Daubert factors to make a policy judgment about intelligent design.
98) The Daubert opinion lists several factors germane to the question of whether or not proffered evidence constitutes admissible "scientific knowledge", or more commonly known as the Daubert factors.
Courts often do not critically apply the Daubert factors but merely accept toolmark or ballistics identification as scientifically reliable.
The now famous Daubert factors are: (1) testing; (2) peer
A previous article in The Appraisal Journal considered cases in which the Daubert factors were applied to the methodology used when the valuation of real estate was an issue.
40) The district court reviewed the expert's methodology, which was described as technical, and applied the Daubert factors.
Once it considers the Daubert factors, the court then can consider whether other factors, not mentioned in Daubert, are relevant to the case at hand.
63) Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the Daubert factors are not equally applicable, and may not be applicable at all, in every case.
In some cases, lower courts have been frustrated in their attempt to apply the Daubert factors to certain disciplines, including the social sciences.
The Daubert factors are used by the trial court to consider whether an expert witness, when basing testimony on professional studies or on personal experience, employs in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field.
The district court concluded that none of the Daubert factors was satisfied and excluded the plaintiff's testimony and granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
For proposed economic testimony, the Daubert factors of testability, peer review and "general acceptance," should not be difficult to meet.