WHITHER DAUBERT - RELIABLE RESOLUTION OF SCIENTIFICALLY-BASED CAUSALITY ISSUES IN TOXIC TORT CASES

This Article addresses the resolution of ''causality'' disputes in tor t cases where expert scientific testimony is offered to link an allege dly harmful substance and plaintiff's disease or disability. The autho rs contend that both functional analysis and recent Seventh Amendment jurisprudence support allocating the decisional role in such causality disputes to courts rather than lay juries. They track the evolution o f expert scientific testimony from early common law to the Supreme Cou rt's recent decisions in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmeceuticals, Inc. and General Electric Co. v. Joiner and establish the tension arising f rom the courts' role as judicial ''gatekeepers,'' controlling the admi ssibility of expert scientific evidence and the lay juries' role as de cisionmakers in scientific disputes. They contend that a shift of the ultimate decisional responsibility to the courts would properly and co nstitutionally resolve this tension and create a sounder foundation fo r the intense judicial involvement already occurring under Daubert.