Legal Opinion

Quintana v. Acosta

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided December 12, 2013No. 34,427; Docket No. 31,585PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

VIGIL, Judge.

{1} In this medical malpractice case, Defendants moved to exclude the causation opinion of Plaintiffs’ expert witness on the basis that the expert was unqualified to give his opinion regarding the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics and that the testimony was scientific knowledge, which Plaintiffs were unable to establish as reliable. The district court agreed, excluded the expert’s causation opinion, and therefore dismissed the case. Concluding that the district court erred in ruling that the proposed testimony was scientific knowledge, which requires compliance with…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. State v. AlbericoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. AlbericoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. TorresNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. AndersonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Quintana v. AcostaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2013
  2. State v. PeltNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API