Imagine having the ability to defeat dozens, if not hundreds or even thousands of cases, with a single motion. From a defendant's perspective, finding the tool to accomplish that goal would be a dream come true. The process of multidistrict litigation (MDL), whereby federal cases from around the country are centralized in a single federal district court for coordinated pretrial proceedings, provides such an opportunity.
One of the most important features of product liability litigation is the role of the expert. Products cases often rise and fall upon whether a court will accept the methodology and testimony of an expert, particularly one who espouses an opinion as to whether the product at issue could cause, and in fact caused, the alleged injury. Under well-enshrined case law, the trial court plays an essential "gatekeeping" role in determining whether expert testimony is admissible in a particular case, commonly referred to in the federal system as "Daubert."
This article explores the interplay (or intersection) between the worlds of MDLs and Daubert in product liability litigation. In particular, this article addresses:
- The import of Daubert to the MDL process
- The timing of Daubert motions in an MDL proceeding
- The use of "Science Days"
- Favorable MDL Daubert rulings
- Overcoming an adverse Daubert ruling
- Federal-state coordination of the expert process
» Download the report.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
