Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Osburn v. Anchor Laboratories, Inc – Case Brief Summary (Federal Court)

In Osburn v. Anchor Laboratories, Inc., 825 F.2d 908 (5th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1009 (1988), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected the argument that a causation opinion was inadmissible because it "has not been widely accepted in the medical field," explaining:

An expert's opinion need not be generally accepted in the scientific community before it can be sufficiently reliable and probative to support a jury finding. . . . What is necessary is that the expert arrived at his causation opinion by relying upon methods that other experts in his field would reasonably rely upon in forming their own, possibly different opinions, about what caused the patient's disease. . . . Thus, medical expert opinion testimony that is controversial in its conclusions can support a jury finding of causation as long as the doctor's conclusory opinion is based upon well-founded methodologies. (Id. at 915.)