Category Archives: Trial Practice

Which Gate Do I Enter? Expert Admissibility Standards Far From Uniform

  In August, the New Jersey Supreme Court released its opinion in In Re: Accutane Litigation, which as fans of expert-admissibility standards will know essentially moved New Jersey into the column of states that apply a Daubert-based test, rather an a Frye-based test, in evaluating the admissibility of scientific and expert testimony. For anyone who has not yet seen the opinion, a copy can be found here. (Note – it is lengthy, so get a full cup of coffee before you sit…

Continue Reading....

Treating Physicians’ Right to Disagree With Their Patients

A recent appellate decision allowed defendants’ retention of experts who previously treated one or more of the hundreds of plaintiffs claiming damages in the pelvic mesh litigation against Johnson & Johnson. The decision in In Re Pelvic Mesh/Gynecare Litigation   should have a positive impact for the defense of mass litigation as well as the development of treating physician fact witness testimony in “ordinary” personal injury and products liability cases.  The Appellate Division rejected plaintiffs’ argument that treating physicians have a broad duty to “refuse affirmative…

Continue Reading....