Court Permits Expert Testimony on Cell Phones and Tumors
Author: Ashcraft & Gerel LLP
Published: 2014/08/08 - Updated: 2026/04/23
Publication Type: Announcement
Category Topic: Communication - Related Publications
Contents: Synopsis - Introduction - Main - Insights, Updates
Synopsis: This report covers a Washington, D.C. Superior Court ruling by Judge Frederick H. Weisberg permitting five scientific expert witnesses to testify in 13 consolidated lawsuits brought by plaintiffs who developed brain tumors allegedly connected to cell phone use. The court determined that the experts satisfied the Dyas/Frye legal standards governing the admissibility of scientific testimony, following evidential hearings held in December 2013 and January 2014 that reviewed hundreds of exhibits. The ruling references a May 2014 French case-control epidemiological study identifying a possible association between heavy mobile phone use and brain tumors, and it carries practical relevance for consumers, seniors, and people with disabilities who rely heavily on mobile devices, since it moves the cases forward to fact discovery and may shape future disclosures about radiation exposure from handsets manufactured by Motorola, Qualcomm, Nokia, Audiovox, and Samsung - Disabled World (DW).
- Topic Definition: Dyas/Frye Standard
The Dyas/Frye standard is the legal test used in the District of Columbia and several other United States jurisdictions to determine whether scientific expert testimony is admissible in court. Derived from the 1923 federal decision in Frye v. United States and refined locally by Dyas v. United States, the rule requires that the methodology or principle underlying an expert's opinion be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance within the relevant scientific community, and that the witness be qualified as an expert in that field. Judges applying this standard act as gatekeepers, excluding novel or fringe techniques while allowing testimony grounded in methods the broader discipline recognizes as reliable.
Introduction
Court Allows Testimony in Alleging Cell Phone Linked Brain Tumors
A Washington, D.C. superior court ruled that five scientific expert witnesses can testify for consumers suffering from brain tumors allegedly caused or promoted by cell phone use, Ashcraft & Gerel LLP, Morganroth and Morganroth, PLLC, Lundy, Lundy, Soileau & South, L.L.P. and co-counsel said.
Main Content
Judge Frederick H. Weisberg, who is presiding over 13 consolidated lawsuits against the telecom industry, ruled that experts met the Dyas/Frye legal standards and can offer testimony related to injury causation and health effects. The court held evidential hearings in December 2013 and January 2014 and reviewed hundreds of exhibits.
Judge Weisberg noted that, while the court did not decide the issue of whether cell phones cause brain tumors, new scientific studies and information have emerged recently. His order referred to a May 2014 French case-control epidemiological study that found support for "a possible association between heavy mobile phone use" and brain tumors.
Each of the plaintiffs in the litigation suffers from a brain tumor or is suing for a family of someone who died of brain cancer.
The plaintiffs are represented by Morganroth and Morganroth, PLLC, of Birmingham, Mich.; Ashcraft & Gerel LLP, of Washington, D.C., and Lundy, Lundy, Soileau & South, LLP, of Lake Charles, La.; The Knoll Law Firm, LLC, of Marksville, La.; Pribanic & Pribanic, LLC, of Pittsburgh; Frasier, Frasier & Hickman, LLP, of Tulsa, Okla.; and Bernstein Liebhard, LLP, of New York.
Hunter Lundy, of Lundy, Lundy, Soileau & South, LLP, said, "The telecom industry argued for years that cell phone consumer litigants could not produce scientists who could relate exposure to cell phone radiation to tumors. The ruling today refutes that contention and our experts' opinions, having met the Dyas/Frye test, are admissible."
Jeffrey B. Morganroth, of Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC, said, "We now have opinions and testimony from prominent scientific experts that will be admissible and support our clients' claims that cell phone radiation can cause brain tumors in humans. With this landmark ruling, the cases are moving forward to fact discovery."
Michelle Parfitt and James F. Green, of Ashcraft & Gerel LLP, said, "The evidence presented at the evidential hearings months ago only included publicly available materials and did not include any testing data or information in possession of the defendants. We will seek that information as soon as possible."
The first of the consolidated cases is "Michael Patrick Murray, et al., v. Motorola, Inc., et al.," Case No. 2001 CA 008479 B in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia. The defendants in the cases are Motorola, Inc., Qualcomm, Inc., Nokia, Inc., Audiovox Communications Corp., and Samsung Telecomm American, LLC.
Insights, Analysis, and Developments
Editorial Note: The court's decision to admit this expert testimony does not resolve the underlying scientific question of whether cell phone radiation causes brain tumors, but it does signal that peer-reviewed research has reached a threshold of credibility sufficient for a jury to weigh - a meaningful procedural development for anyone following the long running debate over wireless device safety, and a reminder that consumers who depend on mobile communication, particularly those with disabilities or chronic conditions who may use handsets heavily for assistive purposes, have a stake in how these cases proceed and what internal industry data eventually comes to light during discovery - Disabled World (DW).Attribution/Source(s): This quality-reviewed publication was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World (DW) due to its relevance to the disability community. Originally authored by Ashcraft & Gerel LLP and published on 2014/08/08, this content may have been edited for style, clarity, or brevity.