Chapman v. Proctor & Gamble Distribution, LLC
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
766 F.3d 1296 (2014)
Marianne Chapman (plaintiff) used Fixodent denture adhesive for eight years and was later diagnosed with myelopathy, which she attributed to copper-deficiency myelopathy (CDM) caused by zinc in the product. She sued Proctor & Gamble (defendant), offering experts who testified Fixodent can generally cause CDM, plus a treating expert, Dr. Greenberg, who diagnosed her with CDM after the suit was filed and opined that her Fixodent use specifically caused it, using a differential-diagnosis method that is supposed to rule out other possible causes. Greenberg never considered whether Chapman's myelopathy might be idiopathic, hereditary, or multi-causal, and needed additional testing even after his initial diagnosis; P&G presented evidence Chapman had neurological problems since childhood. The district court excluded the expert testimony under Daubert as unreliable on both general and specific causation and granted summary judgment for P&G.
Whether, when there is no medical consensus that a substance can cause the plaintiff's alleged injury, courts must apply a two-part Daubert analysis to expert testimony on both general and specific causation.