Lust ex rel. Lust v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Good Law
89 F.3d 594·96 Daily Journal DAR 8334·45 Fed. R. Serv. 149·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 16690·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5160
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 11, 1996No. 95-55558California1,511 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Farris, J.

Peter A. Lust brought a personal injury action against Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. alleging that his birth defect, diagnosed as hemifacial microsomia, was caused by his mother’s ingestion of Clomid, a fertility drug manufactured by Merrell Dow. California law dictates that causation is a necessary element of a personal injury action. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Merrell Dow on the grounds that Lust’s only causation evidence — the expert opinion of Dr. Alan Done — did not reflect scientific knowledge and was inadmissible under F.R.E. 702. The district court had diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332 , and we have jurisdiction over the appeal. 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

*596 I. Background

The district court held an in limine hearing pursuant to F.R.E. 104(a) to determine whether Done’s opinion was admissible under F.R.E. 702. Done explained the reasoning underlying his conclusion that Clomid is a human teratogen (i.e., an agent that causes birth defects) that causes hemifacial microso-mia:

Done found that human epidemiological studies reported a positive association between ingestion of Clomid and a wide variety of birth defects, that animal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.