The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

A relaxed standard for determining whether expert testimony should be allowed to establish causation in a medical malpractice case has been adopted by New York’s Appellate Division, 2nd Department. The judges cautioned against an overly demanding approach to expert testimony which could result in prematurely choking off valid claims. The appellate court ruled that the trial court had “too restrictively” applied the test formulated in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), for determining when expert testimony on a novel scientific issue should be permitted.

Comments are closed.

Of Interest