For decades, California state court judges have allowed juries to hear expert medical causation opinions that would not have passed muster either in federal courts or in other states whose courts follow Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1995), and the admissibility rules enacted consistent with Daubert. California courts have not, until now, mandated a rigorous “gatekeeper” role for their trial judges. The relative ease with which California state courts admitted scientifically questionable science opinions in contentious pharmaceutical and environmental tort cases turned these courts into some of the most congenial forums for enterprising plaintiffs “mass torts” counsel. Remarkably, that is about to change radically, and almost certainly, to the significant advantage of previously at-high-risk corporate defendants.
To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.
Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.
ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at email@example.com