In mass tort litigation, plaintiffs must prove not only that the defendant’s product can cause the alleged injury (general causation) but also that it did cause their injury (specific causation). One method of proving specific causation is through “differential diagnosis” in which medical experts consider possible causes of a disease, and, through a scientifically rigorous process, rule out each possibility.
However, before a defendant’s product can appear on a list of possible causes, plaintiffs must show that the product can cause the disease generally (general causation). This article compares two recent New York Supreme Court decisions interpreting Parker v. Mobil Oil,1 which provides guidance about the type of epidemiological evidence needed to support general causation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
