Legal Opinion

Goeb v. Tharaldson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 17, 2000No. CX-98-2275PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BLATZ, Chief Justice.

Appellants Lawrence and Diane Goeb brought this action against Respondents Timothy Tharaldson d/b/a Duluth Quality Pest Control (Tharaldson), and Dow Chemical Company, d/b/a DowElanco (Dow), alleging that they and their son were permanently injured by their exposure to the insecticide Dursban. Dow moved to exclude several of appellants’ expert witnesses, and moved for summary judgment as to the issue of medical causation. In granting the motions, the district court excluded appellants’ experts because they used methodology that was not generally accepted under Frye…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Howerton v. Arai Helmet, Ltd.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2004
  2. Grady v. Frito-Lay, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Christian v. GraySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2003
  4. State v. JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
  5. Blackwell v. WyethCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009

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

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

Powered by the Exa API