Some Implications of Daubert and Its Potential for Misuse: Misapplication to Environmental Tort Cases and Abuse of Rule 706(a) Court-Appointed Experts

Authors

Ellen Relkin, Law Offices of Sybil Shainwald, P.C.

Abstract

This Commentary will address an array of issues underlying and emerging from the disputes in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and its inevitable progeny, from a practitioner's perspective representing plaintiffs in toxic tort litigation. It is intended to provide real examples that debunk the quaint but unrealistic notion that science is pure and insulated from economics and politics, the propagandized suggestion that it is the plaintiff's expert who promotes "fringe" or "junk" science, and the belief that epidemiology is the sine qua non of proving causation of a disease. It will also address the potential perils of the court-appointed Rule 706 expert witness.

Keywords

Testimony, Legal Practice and Procedure, Evidence, Judges, Plaintiffs

Disciplines

Evidence | Judges | Law

Recommended Citation

Ellen Relkin, Some Implications of Daubert and Its Potential for Misuse: Misapplication to Environmental Tort Cases and Abuse of Rule 706(a) Court-Appointed Experts, 15 Cardozo L. Rev. 2255 (1994).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/clr/vol15/iss6/19