Magic Bullet?

This article details a victory for DaimlerChrysler as a Defendant in an asbestos lawsuit in New York. DaimlerChrysler challenged the qualifications of the plaintiffs experts under the Frye Doctrine and were able to obtain a ruling that the plaintiff's firm pursued a frivolous lawsuit against the company. The Court further awarded DaimlerChrysler over $10,000 in damages and reimbursement of expenses.

The article also discusses some elements of the Frye Doctrine:

In its motion to preclude, Daimler Chrysler asked for a hearing under the Frye doctrine of the U.S. Supreme Court, to determine if the witnesses met a standard of reliability. A Frye hearing focuses on general acceptance in the relevant scientific community as the sole factor for determining reliability. A plaintiff needs reliable expert testimony to prove his case, said attorney Mary Wells of Denver, who has written on the Frye doctrine. If the testimony is not up to standard, the plaintiff cannot prevail. Wells said breast implant litigation of the 1990s provides the best example of the value of Frye hearings." There was an absence of reliable methods," she said. "The litigation was effectively terminated because the plaintiffs could not prove the case.