§Why CasetextPricing

Murthy v. Abbott Laboratories

MOTION for Summary Judgment on Causation

37 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,238 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Boudreaux v. Swift Transp. Co., Inc.

    402 F.3d 536 (5th Cir. 2005)   Cited 2,123 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Explaining non-moving party's burden is not satisfied by "some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts, by conclusory allegations, by unsubstantiated assertions, or by only a scintilla of evidence"

  3. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Havner

    953 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1997)   Cited 2,401 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that more than a scintilla of evidence requires "reasonable and fair-minded people to differ in their conclusions."

  4. Allison v. McGhan Medical

    184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999)   Cited 817 times
    Holding 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"

  5. Coastal Transport v. Crown Cent. Petrol

    136 S.W.3d 227 (Tex. 2004)   Cited 501 times
    Holding that speculation is not evidence

  6. Seacor Holdings v. Commonwealth Ins. Co.

    635 F.3d 675 (5th Cir. 2011)   Cited 175 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Applying near-identical Louisiana contract-interpretation law

  7. Milward v. Acuity Specialty Products Group

    639 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2011)   Cited 168 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[e]pidemiological studies are not per se required as a condition of admissibility regardless of context”

  8. Guinn v. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals LP

    602 F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 2010)   Cited 115 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff's expert's differential diagnosis “must at least consider other factors that could have been the sole cause of the plaintiff's injury”

  9. Brookshire Brothers, v. Smith

    176 S.W.3d 30 (Tex. App. 2005)   Cited 124 times
    Holding expert testimony required to show causation of reactive airway dysfunction syndrome

  10. In re Breast Implant Litigation

    11 F. Supp. 2d 1217 (D. Colo. 1998)   Cited 128 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a chemist's "asserted expertise in biomaterials does not make him qualified in the many areas of medical science in which he opines" and the "design, manufacturing, marketing, or labeling of silicone breast implants"

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,775 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses

    Fed. R. Evid. 702   Cited 26,670 times   255 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the Daubert standard

  13. Section 262 - Regulation of biological products

    42 U.S.C. § 262   Cited 196 times   396 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a license shall issue "only upon a showing" by the manufacturer

  14. Section 201.57 - Specific requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products described in Section 201.56(b)(1)

    21 C.F.R. § 201.57   Cited 252 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Listing requirements for different subsections for indications, dosage, and clinical studies

  15. Section 201.56 - Requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products

    21 C.F.R. § 201.56   Cited 85 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Disallowing claims or suggestions of drug use on labeling if there is a lack of substantial evidence