Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
509 U.S. 579 (1993)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Jason Daubert and Eric Schuller were minors born with birth defects. The minors and their parents (collectively, Daubert) (plaintiffs) brought suit against Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (Merrell) (defendant), alleging that its product Bendectin caused the defects. Daubert brought forth the testimony of eight scientific experts who had concluded that Bendectin could cause birth defects. However, the district court granted Merrell’s motion for summary judgment, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed, because Daubert’s experts’ opinions were based on scientific techniques that were not “generally accepted” in the scientific community and as a result, their testimony was not admissible under Frye v. United States. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine the proper standard for admitting expert testimony of scientific knowledge.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
