On November 1, 2000, WLF filed a brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to impose a rule designed to ensure that trial courts do not permit plaintiffs’ lawyers to use “junk science” to bolster tenuous tort claims against deep-pocketed defendants. WLF urged the Court to review a product liability case in which a jury awarded $17.5 million in damages, despite an admission by the only “expert” to testify for the plaintiffs that he had never even tested the automobile he claimed was defective. WLF argued that the only way to ensure that the trial judge has fulfilled this required “gatekeeping” function is to establish a rule that trial judges must provide some sort of explanation regarding a decision to admit or exclude expert testimony. Although the Supreme Court issued an order on December 5, 2000 declining to review the Ford case, WLF has pledged to continue to press this issue to ensure that rules against admission of “junk science” evidence are enforced.
