Legal Opinion
Banks v. IMC Kalium Carlsbad Potash Co.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided October 24, 2002No. 21,437PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBINSON, Judge.
{1} The opinion filed in this ease on May 9, 2002 is hereby withdrawn and the following substituted therefor. The motion for rehearing is denied.
{2} This case presents an issue of first impression concerning the standard of admissibility for the testimony of a treating physician in cases adjudicated by the Workers’ Compensation Administration (the Administration). We hold that the standards for the admissibility of expert testimony adopted by the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), and…
2Cases cited27 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
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Commonwealth v. LaniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
- Woolwine v. Furr's, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Banks v. IMC Kalium Carlsbad Potash Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. TollardoNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2003