In this case, involving multi-county baby powder litigation, the Appellate Division ruled that the trial court abused its discretion when it barred the plaintiff’s’ experts opinions on causation. The Court held that the experts’ opinions were based on sound methodology applied to data upon which experts in their field may reasonably rely. The trial court … Read more
The Supreme Court held that a trial court may not question the merits of an expert’s scientific theories, techniques or conclusions, and it is not part of the function of the trial court to assess whether it considers those theories, techniques and/or conclusions to be accurate or reliable based upon the available facts and data.
In this child sex assault prosecution, the Commonwealth called as a witness a forensic interviewer who testified about her interview of the minor victim. Over defense objections, she opined as to the importance of sensory detail for children generally, though she was not offered as an expert. The Superior Court found admission of this evidence … Read more
#CivilLaw #MedMal #ExpertTestimony 04/28/2020- Rolon, as the administrator of the estate of Maria Sanchez-Rodriguez, filed med mal action against Davies as well as others, alleging the defendants’ negligence led to the death of his wife, Ms. Sanchez-Ridriguez. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants, and Rolon appealed. The Superior Court affirmed in part and … Read more
#ExpertTestimony #CivPro The Supreme Court affirmed per curium based on the Appellate Division’s opinion, but wrote to emphasize the trial court’s erroneous application of NJRE 802 & 703 to the of the proposed expert testimony of a life care planner. Though some of the information the proposed expert was to rely on was not certified … Read more