We’ve already provided our readers with our list of the testimony (trial and deposition) of the seemingly ubiquitous plaintiff’s expert Dr. Suzanne Parisian, although we admit that our readers have not been very conscientious in updating us with new transcripts.

Be that as it may, in this post we’re taking the next logical step – we’re looking at the numerous court decisions where the admissibility of Dr. Parisian’s testimony was successfully challenged, in whole or in part.  We’re categorizing the exclusions by topic, starting with those that exclude her altogether as a witness, and working our way down.  Because we don’t believe in doing the other side’s research for them, we’re not listing topics on which she was allowed to testify, however, be aware that, if a decision is not in the first paragraph, it did allow her to testify, at least as to something.

Here goes:

Cases Totally Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Testimony:  Miller v. Stryker Instruments, 2012 WL 1718825, at *10-12 (D. Ariz. Mar. 29, 2012) (no coherent methodology; unhelpful; legal conclusions; narrative testimony; unqualified to give medical testimony; ipse dixit; reliance on after-the-fact events); Kaufman v. Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2011 WL 7659333, at *6-10 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 4, 2011) (ipse dixit; conclusory; lack of methodology; opinions not tied to FDA regulations or to facts; irrelevant bases; intent/state of mind; outside scope of expertise; outside relevant time period),reconsideration denied, 2011 WL 10501233 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 10, 2011) (narrative testimony; lack of methodology; outside relevant time period); Hogan v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2011 WL 1533467, at *2-3 (E.D.N.Y. April 24, 2011) (FDA issues irrelevant; unqualified as to industry standards); Lopez v. I-Flow Inc., 2011 WL 1897548, at *9-10 (D. Ariz. Jan. 26, 2011) (legal conclusions; conclusory; improper state of mind/intent opinions; narrative testimony; bases not connected to conclusions; ipse dixit; speculative; outside expertise); In re Trasylol Products Liability Litigation, 709 F. Supp.2d 1323, 1336-51 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (unqualified as to foreign regulations and medical causation; narrative testimony; ipse dixit; corporate knowledge and intent; FDA violation testimony conclusory and not tied to regulations; opinions beyond scope of report; improper reliance on internal documents; lack of methodology; speculation; advocate not an expert),certification denied, 2010 WL 2541892 (S.D. Fla. June 22, 2010); In re Prempro Products Liability Litigation, 554 F. Supp.2d 871, 879-87 (E.D. Ark. 2008) (erroneous admission of Parisian testimony required new trial on punitive damages; narrative testimony, ipse dixit; testimony not connected to FDA regulations), aff’d in pertinent part, reversed in part on other grounds, 586 F.3d 547, 571 (8th Cir. 2009); Jacobs v. Caesars Entertainment, Inc., 2007 WL 594714, at *4 (E.D. La. Feb. 21, 2007) (insufficient factual basis; unreliable methodology), reconsideration denied, 2007 WL 1558717, at *2 (E.D. La. May 30, 2007), aff’d, 280 Fed. Appx. 424 (5th Cir. 2008);Nelson v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2006 WL 6225071 (D.D.C. Sept. 26, 2006) (minute order); Barnes v. EBI Medical Systems, Inc., 2001 WL 36105533 (Vir. Cir. Spotsylvania Co. Jan. 26, 2001) (legal opinion; lack of qualifications; no foundation; speculation).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Opinions That The Defendant Violated FDA Regulations:  Block v. Woo Young Medical Co., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 1314449, at *13 (D. Minn. March 28, 2013) (compliance generally); Dopson-Troutt v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2013 WL 1344755, at *3 (M.D. Fla. April 2, 2013) (compliance with regulation predicated on “causal relationship”; legal conclusions); Guenther v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2013 WL 1278089, at *2-3 (M.D. Fla. March 28, 2013) (compliance with regulation predicated on “causal relationship”; legal conclusions); Chiles v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 539891, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 7, 2013) (legal conclusions); Lemons v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 849 F. Supp.2d 608, 615 (W.D.N.C. 2012) (legal conclusions); Lyman v. Pfizer, Inc., 2012 WL 2971550, at *6 (D. Vt. July 20, 2012) (legal conclusions); Baldonado v. Wyeth, 2012 WL 2921026, at *2-3 (N.D. Ill. July 17, 2012) (sandbagging; untimeliness); Barnes v. Orthofix International NV, 2012 WL 1931224, at *5 (W.D. Wash. May 23, 2012) (legal conclusions);Pritchett v. I-Flow Corp., 2012 WL 1059948, at *6- (D. Colo. March 28, 2012) (unqualified to give legal conclusions; invades role of judge and jury); Hines v. Wyeth, 2011 WL 2680842, at *5-6 (S.D.W. Va. July 8, 2011) (conclusory), order clarified on reconsideration, 2011 WL 2730908 (S.D.W. Va. July 13, 2011); In re Heparin Products Liability Litigation, 2011 WL 1059660, at *8 (N.D. Ohio March 21, 2011) (as to reasonableness of compliance); In re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Products Liability Litigation, 2007 WL 1964337, at *7 (D. Minn. June 29, 2007) (legal conclusion; improper foundation); Lillebo v. Zimmer, Inc., 2005 WL 388598, at *4-5 (D. Minn. Feb. 16, 2005) (FDA legal requirements and compliance);Oakberg v. Zimmer, Inc., 2004 WL 5503779, at *2 (D. Mont. Nov. 23, 2004) (content, application, or violation of FDA regulations; FDA regulatory clearance or reporting requirements), aff’d in pertinent part, reversed in part on other grounds, 211 F. Appx. 578, 580 (9th Cir. 2006); Bessemer v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2010 WL 2300222 (N.J. Super. Law Div. April 30, 2010) (legal opinions).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Testimony About Pharmaceutical Industry Standards:  In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 76140, at *12, *14-15 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2013) (use of “Dear Doctor” letters; opinions contrary to learned intermediary rule); Lemons v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 849 F. Supp.2d 608, 615 (W.D.N.C. 2012) (NDA approval, pharmacovigilence and monitoring of clinical trials; no expertise); Chandler v. Greenstone Ltd., 2012 WL 882756, at *2 (W.D. Wash. March 14, 2012) (reasonableness);  Deutsch v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 768 F. Supp. 2d 420, 468 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (no expertise); Cross v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2011 WL 3498305, at *5 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 10, 2011) (industry custom and practice); Rivera Adams v. Wyeth, 2010 WL 5072061, at *3 (D.P.R. Dec. 3, 2010) (industry standard of care); Ingram v. Wyeth, 2010 WL 5663003, at *3 (E.D. Ark. Sept. 16, 2010) (conclusory; speculative); In re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Products Liability Litigation, 2007 WL 1964337, at *7 (D. Minn. June 29, 2007) (legal conclusion); Oakberg v. Zimmer, Inc., 2004 WL 5503779, at *2 (D. Mont. Nov. 23, 2004) (marketing and advertising; warnings),aff’d in pertinent part, reversed in part on other grounds, 211 F. Appx. 578, 580 (9th Cir. 2006); Linsley v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2000 WL 343358, at *4-5 (E.D. La. Mar. 30, 2000) (adequacy of warning).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Testimony Concerning Medical Issues:  Block v. Woo Young Medical Co., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 1314449, at *14 (D. Minn. March 28, 2013) (medical causation); Chiles v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 539891, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 7, 2013) (medical causation); Lemons v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 849 F. Supp.2d 608, 615 (W.D.N.C. 2012) (medical causation); Jenkins v. Novartis Pharmeceuticals Corp., 2012 WL 6213494, at *7 (E.D. Tenn. Dec. 13, 2012) (mechanisms of medical causation); Hill v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2012 WL 5451809, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2012) (medical causation and diagnosis); Winter v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2012 WL 827305, at *5 (W.D. Mo. March 8, 2012) (medical causation); Forman v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 794 F. Supp. 2d 382, 384 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (medical causation); Deutsch v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 768 F. Supp.2d 420, 469 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (not qualified to diagnose disease); In re Heparin Products Liability Litigation, 2011 WL 1059660, at *8 (N.D. Ohio March 21, 2011) (medical or physiological causation); In re Human Tissue Products Liability Litigation, 582 F. Supp. 2d 644, 665-71 (D.N.J. 2008) (possible methods of transmitting several diseases; speculation; unqualified); Oakberg v. Zimmer, Inc., 2004 WL 5503779, at *2 (D. Mont. Nov. 23, 2004) (medical causation), aff’d in pertinent part, reversed in part on other grounds, 211 F. Appx. 578, 580 (9th Cir. 2006); Linsley v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2000 WL 343358, at *4-5 (E.D. La. Mar. 30, 2000) (medical causation; adequacy of warning to physician); see Anderson v. Frank, 2009 WL 5172680 (Pa. C.P. Philadelphia Co. Dec. 15, 2009) (imposing sanctions because Dr. Parisian was not an “appropriate licensed professional” eligible to testify in medical malpractice case).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Testimony About Corporate Intent/Motive/State Of Mind/Ethics:  Lemons v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 849 F. Supp.2d 608, 615 (W.D.N.C. 2012);Hill v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2012 WL 5451809, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2012); Pritchett v. I-Flow Corp., 2012 WL 1059948, at *6 (D. Colo. March 28, 2012); Chandler v. Greenstone Ltd., 2012 WL 882756, at *1 (W.D. Wash. March 14, 2012); Winter v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2012 WL 827305, at *5 (W.D. Mo. March 8, 2012); Deutsch v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 768 F. Supp.2d 420, 467 (E.D.N.Y. 2011); Hines v. Wyeth, 2011 WL 2680842, at *7 (S.D.W. Va. July 8, 2011), order clarified on reconsideration, 2011 WL 2730908, at *2 (S.D.W. Va. July 13, 2011); In re Heparin Products Liability Litigation, 2011 WL 1059660, at *8 (N.D. Ohio March 21, 2011); In re Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Products Liability Litigation, 2010 WL 1796334, at *13 (N.D. Ohio May 4, 2010); In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, 645 F. Supp.2d 164, 192 (S.D.N.Y. 2009); Reece v. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP, 500 F. Supp. 2d 736, 744-46 (S.D. Ohio 2007) (advisability of tests; warnings needed for particular medical conditions; lack of methodology); In re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Products Liability Litigation, 2007 WL 1964337, at *8 (D. Minn. June 29, 2007); Bessemer v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2010 WL 2300222 (N.J. Super. Law Div. April 30, 2010); Singh v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., 2008 WL 5758387, ¶ELS 6 (Wash. Super. Snohomish Co. Jan. 31, 2008).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Narrative Testimony:  In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 76140, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2013); Pritchett v. I-Flow Corp., 2012 WL 1059948, at *7 (D. Colo. Mar. 28, 2012); Hines v. Wyeth, 2011 WL 2680842, at *7 (S.D.W. Va. July 8, 2011), order clarified on reconsideration, 2011 WL 2730908, at *2 (S.D.W. Va. July 13, 2011); In re Heparin Products Liability Litigation, 2011 WL 1059660, at *8 (N.D. Ohio March 21, 2011); In re Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Products Liability Litigation, 2010 WL 1796334, at *13 (N.D. Ohio May 4, 2010);  In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, 645 F. Supp.2d 164, 192 (S.D.N.Y. 2009); Bessemer v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 2010 WL 2300222 (N.J. Super. Law Div. April 30, 2010).

Cases Excluding Dr. Parisian’s Testimony Criticizing Medical Literature:  Hill v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2013 WL 1953753, at *5 (E.D. Cal. May 10, 2013) (ghostwriting); Lemons v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 849 F. Supp.2d 608, 615 (W.D.N.C. 2012) (ghostwriting); Deutsch v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., 768 F. Supp.2d 420, 468-69 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (ghostwriting; funding; personal opinion); In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, 645 F. Supp.2d 164, 191 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (ghostwriting).