The Fourth District Court of Appeal, in Crane Co., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., and Hollingswoth & Vose Co. v. Delisle, 2016 WL 4771438 (Fla. 4th DCA September 14, 2016), recently reversed an $8 million verdict in favor of a plaintiff trying to link his cancer to alleged asbestos in the defendants’ products. After the defendants challenged the admission of the plaintiff’s experts’ causation opinions under Daubert, the appellate court concluded that the trial court abused its discretion and failed to properly exercise its gatekeeping function by allowing the testimony of several of the plaintiff’s experts to be presented to the jury, by simply “taking the experts’ word for it” that their causation opinions were reliable and based on sound scientific principles, and by permitting the experts to claim that their opinions were supported by the “weight of medical literature” without actually identifying any specific literature. In light of the admission of the improper expert testimony, a new trial was ordered for one defendant and the entry of a directed verdict in favor of another defendant was ordered based on a finding that the improper expert opinion was the sole evidence on causation against that defendant. The Delisle court also specifically rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the appellate court lacked authority to apply Daubert since the 2013 legislative change to the Florida Evidence Code, which adopted the Daubert standard, was not yet approved by the Florida Supreme Court, thus demonstrating that unless and until the Florida Supreme Court declares otherwise, Daubert is the law in Florida.