Gary W. Hardyman v. Norfolk & Western Railway Company Norfolk Southern Railway Company Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railway Company

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that district court erred in excluding ergonomics expert testimony on the basis that there was “no scientific study conducted specifically on railroad brakemen”
• holding that district court erred in excluding expert testimony on the ground “there has been no scientific study conducted specifically on railroad brakemen”
• holding that the expert medical testimony regarding the plaintiff‘s carpal tunnel syndrome, ―even without expert 14 causation testimony, certainly would be adequate to provide a jury with the ‗special expertise . . . necessary to draw a causal inference‘‖
• explaining that the court will find “an abuse only if [it is] firmly convinced that the district court erred”
• finding abuse of discretion when district court demanded a method of evaluation that was scientifically impossible
• recognizing differential diagnosis as “an acceptable method of determining causation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).