distinguished the Supreme Court's causation analysis
To put this in terms of a discriminatory causation analysis
Precision in the class period, which requires loss causation analysis
, inheres in the definiteness requirement of Rule 23.
in proximate causation analysis
is one of its main advantages over the
The holding conflicts with a decision last year by the Fifth Circuit that, like the Louisiana appellate court, also applied a causation analysis
to determine if the VPL applied to a homeowners' policy.
The court found that the plaintiffs' expert evidence was insufficient to support a traditional proximate causation analysis
, that but for defendants' negligence Turner would have been cured.
Among other things, Washington charges that the measures are based on an injury and causation analysis
covering only six months of data for each of the years examined, and that they are not based on objective examinations of the volume of dumped imports, the effect of those imports on prices in the domestic market of like products, and the impact of the imports on domestic producers of those products.
8) Many courts embracing a flexible proximate causation analysis
have done so in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Holmes v.
I tried to show by using an instance of an example developed by Lewis, (2) and strictly applying his causation analysis
to it, that the analysis fails.
This inconsistency is cleared up by noting that the causation analysis
is included for the sake of argument or for the sake of completeness.
Ronald Citron is an independent consultant who can share his expertise on causation analysis
of missed cancer diagnosis.
58) The district court in Tatum stated, "This approach is the most fair considering that a causation analysis
would only follow a finding of breach.
See supra note 5 and accompanying text (discussing traditional "but for" causation analysis
prior to Gross).
Instead of relying on causation analysis
borrowed from Hudson, courts should develop arguments from restorative justice and deterrence to distinguish between scope- and manner-based Fourth Amendment violations.
the Court's use of a proximate causation analysis