Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Evidentiary standards

Ruffin v. Shaw Indus., Inc.

The court held that homeowners failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to necessary elements of their negligence, implied warranty of merchantability, express warranty, and strict liability claims against a carpet...

General Elec. Co. v. Joiner

The Court holds that abuse of discretion is the proper standard by which to review a district court's decision to admit or exclude scientific evidence. The Court first holds that the court of appeals applied an overly stringent review...

Kannankeril v. Terminix Int'l, Inc.

The court holds that a district court improperly excluded a medical expert's testimony on causation in a case brought by a family seeking damages for cognitive injuries due to an exterminator's alleged excessive and improper application...

Boughton v. Cotter Corp.

The court holds that plaintiffs in a toxic tort case were not entitled at trial to be certified as a class for medical monitoring, to depose an attorney for the defendant uranium mill, or to present evidence of their fear of contracting...

In re Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos Litig.

The court holds that a district court erred in setting aside a jury verdict and ruling that plaintiff presented insufficient epidemiological and clinical evidence to support a causal connection between asbestos exposure and colon cancer...

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the court holds inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 702 expert testimony offered to prove that plaintiffs' mothers' ingestion of the drug Bendectin during pregnancy caused the plaintiffs to be born...

Renaud v. Martin Marietta Corp.

The court holds that local residents who developed severe health problems failed to present sufficient evidence that their exposure to surface water and groundwater that a missile manufacturer allegedly contaminated and that a municipal...