Wills v. Amerada Hess Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• acknowledging “the district court’s broad discretion to direct and manage the pre-trial discovery process” (citing In re Fitch, Inc., 330 F.3d 104, 108 (2d Cir.2003)). G. The Admissibility of the Testimony of Plaintiff’s Former Counsel Under Local Civil Rule 83.13(a
• “In a case such as 12 this, where an injury has multiple potential etiologies, expert testimony is necessary to establish causation[.]’’
• district court’s preclusion of experts was not an abuse of discretion where plaintiff disclosed them after the deadline
• district court has “broad discretion to direct and manage the pre-trial discovery process.”
• rejecting expert witness’s one-hit theory of causation as unreliable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).