Legal Opinion
Anderson v. AKZO NOBEL COATINGS, INC.
Washington Supreme Court
Decided September 8, 2011No. 82264-6PublishedCited by 53 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChambers, J.
¶1 The trial court in this case ruled that under Washington courts’ application of Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 (1923), there must be general acceptance in the relevant scientific community that a particular type of in útero toxic exposure can cause a particular type of birth defect before expert testimony on causation is admissible. We disagree. We hold that the Frye test is not implicated if the theory and the methodology relied upon and used by the expert to reach an opinion on causation is generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. Additionally, we…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Victor v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by53 opinions
- Lakey v. Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2013
- Antilles School, Inc. v. LembachSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2016
- Volk v. DeMeerleerWashington Supreme Court · 2016
- State Of Washington v. Jorge Luis LizarragaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- State v. SchiermanWashington Supreme Court · 2015
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.