Constance DEIMER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CINCINNATI SUB-ZERO PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• applying a deferential standard of review to the district court’s application of Daubert in affirming the district court’s decision to disallow the plaintiffs expert testimony and grant the defendant’s motion for a judgment as a matter of law
• excluding testimony of expert who did not have the “requisite experience to assess a medical device’s suitability for its intended purpose within the hospital environment or to assess its adherence to the prevailing standards for similar machines.”
• “This task requires that the district court consider whether the testimony has been subjected to the scientific method; it must rule out ‘subjective belief or unsupported speculation.”
• physi- cian is not qualified to testify on matters beyond his “requisite experience”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).