9/20 Significant Appellate Ruling, Toxicoses Proof of Causation!! Dr. Shoemaker

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

Please pass this information on to those who could benefit from the

information. Appellate decision regarding proof of causation of mycotoxicoses.

Wonderful Judgment. Just out. Headnote says it all.

HEADNOTE

MONTGOMERY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. JOSEPHINE CHESSON ET AL.,

" TRIAL COURT DID NOT ERR OR ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN CONCLUDING THAT THE

METHODOLOGIES EMPLOYED BY APPELLEES’ EXPERT WITNESS, DR. SHOEMAKER, IN HIS

DETERMINATION REGARDING CAUSATION DUE TO EXPOSURE TO MOLD WERE NOT NEW OR NOVEL

SCIENTIFIC TECHNIQUES REQUIRING APPLICATION OF THE FRYEREED TEST. "

NO. 1270, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005

FRYE v. UNITED STATES, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. CIR., 1923);REED v. STATE, 283

MD. 374 (1978); CSX TRANSP., INC. v.MILLER, 159 MD. APP. 123 (2004), CERT.

GRANTED, 384 MD.581 (2005), CERT. DISMISSED, 387 MD. 351 (2005);

If you want a copy of the actually ruling, send an email to

_snk1955@..._ (mailto:snk1955@...)

Sharon Kramer

[Guest guest]

This is great news!!! Finally the courts are going along with the

REAL science and not industry paid science. Hopefully more of the

medical community will follow this example and start working with

the public instead of against them.

Thanks for letting us know about this important decision.

KC

>

> Dear Friends,

>

> Please pass this information on to those who could benefit from

the

> information. Appellate decision regarding proof of causation of

mycotoxicoses.

>

>

> Wonderful Judgment. Just out. Headnote says it all.

>

>

> HEADNOTE

> MONTGOMERY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. JOSEPHINE CHESSON ET AL.,

> " TRIAL COURT DID NOT ERR OR ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN CONCLUDING

THAT THE

> METHODOLOGIES EMPLOYED BY APPELLEES’ EXPERT WITNESS, DR.

SHOEMAKER, IN HIS

> DETERMINATION REGARDING CAUSATION DUE TO EXPOSURE TO MOLD WERE

NOT NEW OR NOVEL

> SCIENTIFIC TECHNIQUES REQUIRING APPLICATION OF THE FRYEREED TEST. "

> NO. 1270, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005

> FRYE v. UNITED STATES, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. CIR., 1923);REED v.

STATE, 283

> MD. 374 (1978); CSX TRANSP., INC. v.MILLER, 159 MD. APP. 123

(2004), CERT.

> GRANTED, 384 MD.581 (2005), CERT. DISMISSED, 387 MD. 351

(2005);

> If you want a copy of the actually ruling, send an email to

> _snk1955@..._ (mailto:snk1955@...)

> Sharon Kramer

>

>

>

>

>