District Court Finds Expert Witness Unpersuasive Based on Lack of Peer Review

摘要

In an April 20, 2006 decision, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York disregarded an expert's testimony on the origin of trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination at a landfill. The court found that the expert used suspect methodology, which had not been peer reviewed, to support his conclusion that Goulds Pumps, Inc. was partially responsible for TCE contamination at the New York landfill. Accordingly, the court dismissed all claims against Goulds Pumps for contribution or allocation of CERCLA response costs. The decision was handed down in Seneca Meadows Inc. v. ECI Liquidating Inc. (Docket Number: 95-6400L).