Search for: "McClain v. Metabolife Intern., Inc." Results 1 - 20 of 25
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2024, 12:41 pm by admin
Metabolife Internat’l, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233, 1249 (11th Cir. 2005) (distinguishing agency assessment of risk from judicial assessment of causation); Williams v. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 10:37 pm by Schachtman
After considerable back and forth, Judge Manguson ultimately concluded that the McGwin study was untrustworthy, and the NAION claims were dismissed.[3] In 2014, the American Medical Association’s internal medicine journal published an observational epidemiologic study of sildenafil (Viagra) use and melanoma.[4] The authors of the study interpreted their study modestly, concluding: “[s]ildenafil use may be associated with an increased risk of developing melanoma. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 9:53 am by Jordan Bublick
Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243  (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 9:53 am by Jordan Bublick
Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243  (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 6:29 am by Steve McConnell
Metabolife Intern, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233, 1236 (11th Cir. 2005), and (2) In re Bextra & Celebrex, 524 F. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 12:01 pm by Bexis
  Building on the Eleventh Circuit’s landmark decision in McClain v. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 2:41 pm by Bexis
Zimmer, Inc., 927 F.2d 124, 130-31 (March 8, 1991) (internal fixation tube and plates) (applying New York law). [read post]
6 May 2010, 4:12 pm by Bexis
Metabolife International, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233, 1247 (11th Cir. 2005); Goebel v. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 4:54 am
Metabolife International, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2005), reversing and requiring judgment n.o.v. where an expert relied on little more than temporal association. [read post]
7 May 2009, 6:08 am
Metabolife International, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233, 1252 (11th Cir. 2005), otherwise, follow us.In Best, there were no applicable epidemiological studies - not that helped the plaintiff, anyway - so the plaintiff's expert (who was also the original treating physician, which helps) reached the conclusion he was paid to reach via differential diagnosis. [read post]