a)    Children were born with birth defects and mother claimed the drug Bendectin, which she took while pregnant to help with nausea, caused the defects.
b)    Defendant’s expert said drug did not cause defect.  Dr. Lamm was a very well-credentialed expert and he looked at scientific studies that covered over 130,000 cases.
c)    Plaintiff’s expert performed animal and test-tube studies and used some written material as well, re-analyzing it.
d)    Prior to this test, the Frye Test was used to determine the admissibility of novel scientific evidence at trial.
(1)    This was a “General Acceptance Test.”
e)    Daubert Test:  Federal Rule of Evidence 702 replaced the Frye Test.
(1)    “Scientific Knowledge” must now be the subject of an expert’s testimony.
(2)    You have to go back to the origin and look at the quality of the science.
(3)    Four Daubert Factors:
(a)    Whether it can be tested–scientific methodology based on hypothesis to test if they can be “falsified.”
(b)    Whether it has been published or subject to peer review.
(c)    Whether the technique has a known or potential rate of error.
(d)    The general acceptance of the technique or theory within a relevant scientific community.
(4)    Judge now has a role as “gatekeeper.”  Judge must determine if opinion and testimony is reliable and should be considered by the jury.
-Since Daubert came out in 1993, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 has been revised in December of last year.
a)    The four elements of Daubert are now codified in FRE 702.
(1)    Testimony must be based on sufficient facts
(2)    Methodology and testing
(3)    Must apply to case…