Tag Archives: Junk Science

Falsehoods About Obstretrical Malpractice & Cerebral Palsy Persist As Smears Against John Edwards

John Edwards' political career is over — and rightly so — but he's still a punching-bag for the "tort reform" crowd. He shouldn't be. Here's an example. Stephen Bainbridge leaves his expertise and reveals himself at least a careless speaker, if not an outright fool. After Eric Johnson at PrawfsBlog discusses teaching a Torts class via John Edwards' Four Trials, Bainbridge criticizes Johnson for failing to note Edwards' "junk science," which Bainbridge 'proves' by block-quoting two spurious conservative articles, one from the Wall Street Journal and the other from the National Review, both decrying Edwards' prosecution of birth trauma cases alleging celebral ... Continue Reading

TweetLikeEmailLinkedIn

‘More Probable Than Not Can’t Be Shown by Probability’

Causation in Tort: General Populations vs. Individual Cases: Abstract: To establish causation, a tort plaintiff must show that it is “more probable than not” that the harm would not have occurred if the defendant had followed the relevant standard of care. Statistical evidence, based on aggregate data, is sometimes introduced to show that the defendant's conduct created a statistically significant increase in the likelihood that the harm would occur. But there is a serious problem with the use of such evidence: It does not establish that in the particular case, the injury was more likely than not to have occurred ... Continue Reading

TweetLikeEmailLinkedIn