Globetti v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, Corp.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
111 F. Supp. 2d 1174 (2000)
After giving birth, Melissa Globetti (plaintiff) was given the drug Parlodel to suppress lactation and days later suffered an acute myocardial infarction that her initial cardiologist attributed to a coronary artery spasm, despite her being otherwise healthy with no family history of heart disease or other risk factors; Globetti sued Sandoz Pharmaceuticals (defendant), alleging Parlodel caused her heart attack, and offered expert testimony using differential diagnosis to rule out alternative causes and conclude Parlodel's known vasoconstrictive, spasm-inducing effects likely caused her AMI. Sandoz challenged the expert testimony's admissibility as scientifically unreliable and moved for summary judgment on medical causation.
Whether expert testimony using the differential-diagnosis method, supported by case studies and literature review, satisfies the Daubert standard for admissibility even though the plaintiff's injury could have had alternative causes.