Bethie Pride v. Bic Corporation Societe Bic, S.A.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the trial court properly refused to allow rebuttal reports that constituted a “transparent attempt” to redress weaknesses identified in the original expert report
• noting that the specialized knowledge requirement of Rule 702 “has always been treated liberally . . . .”
• noting that Tennessee law requires expert testimony in cases alleging manufacturing and design defects
• noting that the party seeking to introduce expert testimony must show that the expert “will testify to scientific knowledge that will assist the trier of fact in understanding and disposing of issues relevant to the case”
• finding no good cause where the plaintiff sought to reopen discovery to cure an alleged deficiency in expert testimony
• affirming a district court’s exclusion of expert testimony when the experts failed to test or validate their hypothesis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).