The court noted that the Plaintiff failed to prove causation, which is necessary element in a products liability action. The court additionally noted that causation requires expert testimony where the issues are medically complex and such testimony must be to a reasonable degree of medical certainty in order to be admissible.
In this case, the court noted that the Plaintiff’s expert denied having any opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty. The court noted that testimony using phrases like “likely” or referring to “possibilities” do not equate to testimony to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.
Given that the Plaintiff was found to be without admissible causation evidence, the Defendant was granted summary judgment.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK. The Court's companion Order can be viewed HERE.
I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Reed Smith law firm in Philadelphia for bringing this case to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.