Keith Royce Ivery v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a pharmaceutical company’s scientific studies were admissible as business records where they contained primarily factual data and no specific objection had been made to those portions of the studies containing the author’s interpretations and conclusions
• noting that \liability under the implied warranty of merchantability in Massachusetts is congruent in nearly all respects with the principles expressed in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A.\ (citation and quotation marks omitted)
• noting that “liability under the implied warranty of merchantability in Massachusetts is congruent in nearly all respects with the principles expressed in Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A.” (citation and quotation marks omitted)
• finding that expert opinion that relied, inter alia, on the “differential diagnosis method of identifying a patient’s symptoms as being among those associated with silicone gel breast implants and eliminating any other causes for these symptoms” was properly admitted
• revising the law of the implied warranty of merchantability to conform with majority of jurisdictions in decision affirming finding of breast implant manufacturer’s liability
• applying Lanigan to uphold admission of expert testimony on silicone breast implants where scientific basis was questionable, results could not be specifically confirmed, and no supporting epidemiological studies existed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).