Haller v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an expert’s opinion would not assist the trier of fact because the testimony related to general knowledge of causation and not to the specific case
• rejecting admission of testimony on the sole grounds it was ipse dixit of an expert witness in the case
• “Standing alone . . . temporal proximity . . . is legally insufficient.”
• excluding expert opinion described as “a veritable moving target” as unreliable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).