Lilley v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “[a] doctor’s expert testimony should not be excluded under Daubert solely on the ground that his causation diagnosis was based only on his patient’s self-reported history.”
• denying motion to exclude even with a lack of knowledge of a prior accident and other matters
• expert testimony was admissible when the expert had no knowledge of previous injuries, and thus did not consider them as potential causes in the case, because the expert was able to distinguish those prior injuries’ symptoms from the symptoms of the injury in question

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).