Saturday, August 13, 2005

Mississippi Supreme Court Upholds Defendant's Medmal Causation Testimony Under Daubert

The Mississippi Supreme Court has upheld the admissibility of causation testimony from a medical malpractice defendant's expert, although the expert's theory did not enjoy support from peer-reviewed literature. The court's opinion emphasizes that the so-called Daubert factors are not exclusive or exhaustive, nor is peer review a necessary condition for admissibility. See Poole v. Avara, 2004-CA-01000-SCT (Miss. Aug. 11, 2005).


Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.