Allison v. McGhan Medical
184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 813 timesHolding that a district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding testimony based in part on four unreliable epidemiological studies that were "in direct contrast to over twenty other epidemiological studies"
McClain v. Metabolife Intern., Inc.
401 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 438 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding that the district court erroneously admitted expert testimony that a weight-loss supplement caused the plaintiff's medical problems
United States v. Downing
753 F.2d 1224 (3d Cir. 1985) Cited 689 timesHolding that “a defendant who seeks the admission of expert testimony must make an on-the-record detailed proffer to the court, including an explanation of precisely how the expert's testimony is relevant to the [issues in dispute]”
Lust ex rel. Lust v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
89 F.3d 594 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 355 timesHolding that although a Daubert ruling was dispositive, the abuse of discretion standard still applies
In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation
645 F. Supp. 2d 164 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) Cited 207 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that expert's "commentary on any documents and exhibits" would be limited to "drawing inferences that would not be apparent without the benefit of experience or specialized knowledge"
Ambrosini v. Labarraque
101 F.3d 129 (D.C. Cir. 1996) Cited 215 timesHolding that because expert opinion was based on differential diagnosis, district court abused its discretion in refusing to admit it
Malletier v. Dooney Bourke, Inc.
525 F. Supp. 2d 558 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) Cited 155 timesHolding that "the expert witness must in the end be giving his own opinion. . . . cannot simply be a conduit for the opinion of an unproduced expert"
Rider v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp.
295 F.3d 1194 (11th Cir. 2002) Cited 147 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding expert opinion to fall short of what " Daubert requires" when finding of reliability would require "several scientifically unsupported `leaps of faith'"
Magistrini v. One Hour Martinizing Dry Cleaning
180 F. Supp. 2d 584 (D.N.J. 2002) Cited 88 times 3 Legal AnalysesNoting that a scientific method of weighting must be explained to prevent a "conclusion-oriented selection process."
Ellis v. C.R. Bard, Inc.
311 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2002) Cited 52 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that where hospital staff was aware of the danger in persons other than the patient activating a morphine pump, the manufacturer of the pump had no duty to warn the patients, and the learned intermediary doctrine applied