Case ID: ad3d_125/html/0461-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bausch & Lomb Contact Lens Solution Product Liability Litigation.
    [999 NYS2d 743]
   Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered May 31, 2013, which, among other things, denied plaintiffs’ motion to renew defendant’s pretrial motion to exclude certain expert opinions, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Even if the motion were timely, plaintiffs failed to show that the alleged new facts would change the court’s prior determination to exclude the general causation opinions of plaintiffs’ experts regarding non-Fusarium corneal infections (see CPLR 2221 [e] [2]). In particular, plaintiffs failed to show that the experts’ causation theory was generally accepted by the relevant medical or scientific community (see Cornell v 360 W. 51st St. Realty, LLC, 22 NY3d 762 [2014]; Matter of Bausch & Lomb Contact Lens Solution Prod. Liab. Litig., 87 AD3d 913, 913 [1st Dept 2011], leave dismissed 19 NY3d 845 [2012]). The new studies submitted by plaintiffs do not support the experts’ causation theory.

We have considered plaintiffs’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Andrias, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.