Precluding Med Mal 'Maternal Forces' Defense

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

Joseph Lichtenstein, the principal of the Law Offices of Joseph M. Lichtenstein, writes: For the most part, the testimony of experts concerning causation is well within the bounds of broadly accepted medical and scientific theory Such testimony is properly challenged through robust cross-examination and is not the subject of a Frye or Parker challenge. Nonetheless, the maternal forces of labor defense has recently been found to be scientifically unreliable by a number of courts in New York.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

Originally appeared in print as Precluding Med Mal 'Maternal Forces' Defense: Is Consensus Emerging?

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202638764381

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.