In Re Aredia & Zometa Products Liability Litigation
754 F. Supp. 2d 934
M.D. Tenn.2010Background
- MDL proceeding in re Aredia and Zometa products liability, captioned Simmons, No. 3:06-MD-1760, before Judge Campbell in the M.D. Tennessee (Nashville) federal court.
- Defendant moved to Daubert-exclude causation testimony of plaintiffs’ non-retained experts (Drs. Yazdani, Yeung, Smith, Mathur, Zamaludin, Haidak, Meyer, and Obeid).
- Court grants the Daubert motion in full, excluding non-retained causation opinions and certain treating-physician causation testimony.
- Court distinguishes treating-physician testimony as admissible for diagnosis/therapy but not for causation absent reliable methodologies.
- Citations to Gass, Wynacht, Lorenzi, Bland, Hawkins guide the reliability and scope of treating-physician causation testimony and Daubert standards.
- The order clarifies that any causation opinions beyond treating observations by retained experts require full Rule 26(a)(2)(B) reports.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether treating physicians may offer causation opinions | Simmons argues treating physicians can opine on causation | Novartis contends causation requires Daubert-qualified expert | Excluded non-retained causation testimony by treating physicians |
| Whether Drs. Yazdani, Yeung, Smith, Mathur, Zamaludin may testify on causation | Plaintiffs rely on treating-physician role for causation | Experts lack qualified causation basis | Excluded their causation testimony |
| Whether Dr Haidak may testify to causation by exclusion | Dr. Haidak could testify by exclusion from treating role | Causation-by-exclusion not admissible under Daubert | Excluded causation testimony by exclusion for Haidak |
| Whether Dr Meyer and Dr Obeid may testify on causation | Plaintiffs rely on qualifications; seek causal opinion | They lack expert causation opinions or admissible basis | Excluded causation testimony for Meyer and Obeid |
| Overall outcome of Daubert motion | N/A | N/A | Grant of Daubert motion; causation opinions by non-retained experts excluded |
Key Cases Cited
- Gass v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc., 558 F.3d 419 (6th Cir. 2009) (treating-physician testimony allowed for diagnosis, not causation; Daubert standard applies)
- Wynacht v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 113 F. Supp. 2d 1205 (E.D. Tenn. 2000) (diagnosis versus causation distinction; treating-physician causation not implied by treatment)
- Lorenzi v. Pfizer, Inc., 519 F. Supp. 2d 742 (N.D. Ohio 2007) (treating physician opinion limited to information from care; Rule 26(a)(2)(B) considerations)
- Bland v. Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, 538 F.3d 893 (8th Cir. 2008) (treating physician testimony; reliability standards for causation)
- Hawkins v. Graceland, 210 F.R.D. 210 (W.D. Tenn. 2002) (written reports and expert testimony distinctions for treating experts)