Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court, urging the court to reinforce rigorous trial judge review of complex scientific evidence. The appeal arose after the trial court properly excluded plaintiffs’ expert testimony—involving the alleged association between talc-based baby powder and ovarian cancer—after performing a rigorous review not only of the extensive literature, but more importantly the methodologies used by plaintiffs’ experts to derive their opinion from that literature. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by evaluating the facts and data underlying plaintiffs’ experts’ opinions, a holding that contravenes the NJ Supreme Court’s landmark In re Accutane (2018) decision, which confirmed a trial court’s rigorous, gatekeeping responsibility. On October 5, the NAM filed an amicus brief in support of J&J petition for review, arguing that if not reversed, the appellate court’s decision will leave trial courts with uncertainty as to the gatekeeping role in New Jersey’s many drug, tort, and product lawsuits involving complex issues of medical causation. Unfortunately, on January 26, 2021, the court denied review.