Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Summary

In the 1950s, the drug Bendectin was developed by Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals to treat morning sickness, used by over 33 million women. However, some women who took the drug gave birth to children with severe birth defects, leading to lawsuits. Despite numerous studies, it was unclear if Bendectin actually caused these defects. The legal battle culminated in the U.S. Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrill Dow, where the Court ruled on the admissibility of expert testimony and scientific evidence, questioning whether Bendectin was responsible for the birth defects.

Takeaways

• 💊 Bendectin was a pregnancy drug developed by Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals in the 1950s to treat morning sickness.
• 🌍 Over 33 million women worldwide used Bendectin during its time on the market.
• ⚠️ Some women who took Bendectin gave birth to children with severe birth defects, leading to numerous lawsuits.
• 💰 The lawsuits became so frequent and expensive that Merrill Dow voluntarily removed Bendectin from the market in 1983.
• 🔬 Despite allegations, it was never conclusively proven that Bendectin caused birth defects.
• 👶 Jason Daubert and Eric Schuler were born with birth defects after their mothers took Bendectin, leading their families to sue Merrill Dow.
• -
• ⚖️ The legal case, Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, reached the United States Supreme Court, centering on whether Bendectin caused the defects.
• 📚 Merrill Dow relied on over 30 published studies showing no link between Bendectin and birth defects.
• 👨‍⚖️ The plaintiffs presented eight expert witnesses who believed Bendectin caused defects, but their opinions were based on indirect evidence, not human studies.
• 🏛️ The federal district court applied the Frye test, ruling that scientific expert testimony must be generally accepted by the scientific community.
• ✅ The plaintiffs’ expert evidence was deemed inadmissible under the Frye standard, leading to summary judgment in favor of Merrill Dow.
• 🔁 The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court's decision, and the plaintiffs petitioned the Supreme Court for review.

Q & A

What was Bendectin and why was it developed?

Bendectin was a pregnancy drug developed by Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals in the 1950s to soothe the symptoms of morning sickness in pregnant women.

How widely was Bendectin used?

Bendectin was used by over 33 million women worldwide.

Why did Merrill Dow take Bendectin off the market?

Merrill Dow took Bendectin off the market in 1983 due to numerous and expensive lawsuits filed by families who claimed the drug caused birth defects.

Was there clear scientific evidence that Bendectin caused birth defects?

No, despite allegations, it was never clearly established that Bendectin caused birth defects even after it was removed from the market.

Who were Jason Daubert and Eric Schuler?

Jason Daubert and Eric Schuler were children born with birth defects whose mothers had taken Bendectin. Their families brought a lawsuit against Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals.

What was the central issue in the Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals case?

The central issue was whether Bendectin actually caused the children's birth defects and whether the plaintiffs’ expert testimony was scientifically admissible.

On what evidence did Merrill Dow rely in the case?

Merrill Dow relied on over 30 published studies on Bendectin, none of which showed that the drug caused birth defects.

What type of evidence did the plaintiffs’ experts present?

The plaintiffs’ experts presented indirect evidence, including animal tests, chemical evaluations of the drug, and re-analyses of previous studies, rather than human-based studies.

What was the Frye test and how did it apply to the case?

The Frye test, established in a 1923 case, requires that admissible scientific expert testimony be based on principles 'generally accepted' by the scientific community. The plaintiffs’ expert testimony failed this standard, leading the district court to rule it inadmissible.

What were the outcomes of the lower courts before the Supreme Court got involved?

The federal district court granted summary judgment for Merrill Dow, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld this decision.

What action did the plaintiffs take after the appeals court ruling?

The plaintiffs petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari, which the Court granted.