Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 NOVEMBER 2017

C.D. Cal. Excludes Three Plaintiff Experts In Breast Implant Case

It is not as if we are delighted to see efforts to resuscitate breast implant litigation, but we won't groan when the rulings are as good as they are in Laux v. Mentor Worldwide, LLC, No. 2:16-cv-01026-ODW(AGR)...

United StatesConsumer Protection

It is not as if we are delighted to see efforts to resuscitate breast implant litigation, but we won't groan when the rulings are as good as they are in Laux v. Mentor Worldwide, LLC, No. 2:16-cv-01026-ODW(AGR) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017). Here, we are talking about Daubert rulings. (The court also issued good preemption rulings that might be the subject of a separate post.) The Laux court's Daubert order is not up on Westlaw or Lexis yet, but it will be, and that is good news for defendants and bad news for plaintiffs.

The plaintiff in Laux alleged that she suffered pain and other injuries as a result of moldy silicone breast implants. Her allegations depended upon opinions by a three experts: Kolb, Blais, and Brewer. At least two of these experts are repeat players. The other might be as well, but we confess to being a little out of touch with this litigation. One plaintiff expert (Kolb) explanted the implants and concluded that they were leaking bilaterally. Another

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from