Legal Opinion
In Re Ephedra Products Liability Litigation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 18, 2005No. 04 MD 1598(JSR)PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
RAKOFF, District Judge.
In Case Management Order No. 14 dated June 23, 2005, the Court granted in part and denied in part the respective motions of the Defendants’ Coordinating Counsel (the “DCC”) and Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Counsel (the “PCC”) to exclude, pursuant to Rule 702, Fed.R.Evid., and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Phamn., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), the testimony of certain “generic” experts. Specifically, the Court held that
[t]he PCC’s experts shall not be permitted to testify with “medical certainty” or “scientific certainty” that ephedra caused…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Nikitas Amorgianos v. National Railroad Passenger CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- Geraldine McCULLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. H.B. FULLER COMPANY, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Restivo v. HessemannCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Giordano v. MARKET AMERICA, INC.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- In re Mirena IUD Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Schwab v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2006
- United States v. GlynnDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.