Search for: "In Re Silicone Breast Implants Liab. Litigation"
Results 1 - 20
of 36
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Apr 2019, 9:35 am
Back in 2001, in the aftermath of the silicone gel breast implant litigation, I participated in a Federal Judicial Center (FJC) television production of “Science in the Courtroom, program 6” (2001). [read post]
2 May 2019, 10:44 am
See In re Breast Implant Cases, 942 F. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 7:48 am
In the silicone gel breast implant litigation, after defense expert witnesses proffered meta-analyses[1], court-appointed expert witnesses adopted the approach and featured meta-analyses in their reports to the MDL court[2]. [read post]
9 Jul 2017, 10:21 am
Silicone There are some glib characterizations of the silicone gel breast implant litigation as having had no evidentiary basis. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 10:28 am
Egilman was sufficiently clever to discern that if his “method” led to a conclusion that silicone gel breast implants cause autoimmune disease, but the Institute of Medicine, along with court-appointed experts, found no basis for a causal conclusion, then by modus tollens Egilman’s “method” was suspect and must be rejected.[1] This awareness likely explains the extent to which he went to cover up his involvement in the plaintiffs’… [read post]
15 May 2015, 7:03 am
In re Agent Orange Product Liab. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 10:04 am
Fla. 2009) Silicone – Breast Implants Allison v. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 6:30 pm
In re Silica Products Liab. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 9:22 am
See, e.g., In re Agent Orange Product Liab. [read post]
2 Oct 2015, 11:00 am
The Brinton Study in Silicone Gel Breast Implant Litigation In the silicone gel breast implant litigation, claimants looked forward to a study by one of their champions, Dr. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 8:08 am
See, e.g., In re Agent Orange Product Liab. [read post]
14 Nov 2020, 10:11 am
Rev. de novo 1, 14 (2009) (“[t]he breast implant litigation was largely based on a litigation fraud. [read post]
14 Nov 2020, 10:11 am
Rev. de novo 1, 14 (2009) (“[t]he breast implant litigation was largely based on a litigation fraud. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 12:29 pm
Supreme Court breathed fresh life into the trial court’s power and obligation to review expert witness opinions and to exclude unsound opinions.[7] Several months before the Supreme Court charted this new direction on expert witness testimony, the silicone breast implant litigation, fueled by iffy science and iffier scientists, erupted.[8] In October 1994, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation created MDL 926, which consolidated the… [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 2:09 pm
The important divide between regulatory practice and the litigation of causal claims in civil actions arises from the theoretical nature of the risk assessment enterprise. [read post]
12 Jun 2011, 8:14 am
” Cardozo Law Review DeNovo 1, 14 (2009) (“[t]he breast implant litigation was largely based on a litigation fraud. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 4:40 pm
Rev. de novo 1, 14 (2009) (describing plaintiffs’ expert witnesses in silicone litigation as “charlatans”; “[t]he breast implant litigation was largely based on a litigation fraud. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 5:45 am
Liab. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 5:36 pm
August 16, 2001) (excluding causation opinion testimony given contrary epidemiologic studies; noting that sufficient epidemiologic evidence requires relative risk greater than two) In re Silicone Gel Breast Implant Litig., 318 F. [read post]
9 Apr 2016, 8:58 am
Liab. [read post]
