Abstract:

The defense of product liability cases filed by plaintiffs alleging that their hearing loss was caused by defendants' noise-making products always involves the analysis of all relevant evidence to determine the relative contributions of different causes (occupational noise, recreational noise, aging, etc.). That is because in most jurisdictions the plaintiff will be required to prove that exposure to the defendant's product was a ``substantial factor'' in causing his or her hearing loss, and because the size of any verdict may depend on the magnitude of that contribution. Moreover, for that same reason and also in order to determine whether a statute of limitations defense is available in the case, it is often important to estimate the progression of a plaintiff's hearing loss over time. All relevant evidence, including quantitative methods based on epidemiological standards supported by expert testimony, should be used to assist the jury in determining whether the plaintiff has proven his or her case by a preponderance of the evidence (50.1% vs 49.9%).