On the Relevance of the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence: Tort System Outcomes Are Principally Determined by Lawyers’ Rates of Return

Authors

Lester Brickman, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of LawFollow

Abstract

The attention generated by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reflects the perceived importance of the issue of the admissibility of scientific evidence in tort litigation. In products liability litigation, whether claimants prevail often depends upon expert testimony presented on the issue of causation. Unless a claimant is able to have the expert's testimony admitted, there will be little or no chance of prevailing. Thus, though it is disputed whether Daubert will extend or contract tort liability, it is undisputed that its importance lies in its impact on the scope of tort liability.

Keywords

Evidence, Scientific Evidence, Scientific Research, Courts, Science and Technology Law

Disciplines

Courts | Evidence | Law | Science and Technology Law

Recommended Citation

Lester Brickman, On the Relevance of the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence: Tort System Outcomes Are Principally Determined by Lawyers’ Rates of Return, 15 Cardozo L. Rev. 1755 (1994).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/clr/vol15/iss6/3