This article addresses a recent decision of a New York state appellate court concerning the admissibility of expert medical testimony to establish causation in a case involving injuries allegedly incurred from treatment with a prescription medication.
Application of the Frye Standard to Medical Expert Testimony
This article addresses a recent decision of a New York state appellate court concerning the admissibility of expert medical testimony to establish causation in a case involving injuries allegedly incurred from treatment with a prescription medication. In <i>Zito v. Zabarsky</i>, 28 A.D.3d 42 (2d Dep't Jan. 24, 2006), the appellate court held that expert testimony that a plaintiff's injury was caused by a prescription medication was admissible when that testimony was based on a single case report indicating a link between the medication and the injury. The court's holding is inconsistent with other New York appellate decisions addressing the admissibility of expert testimony concerning medical causation and threatens to dilute New York's standard for making that assessment, and could have the same effect in other states that apply the same standard.
This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.






