Perry v. Berkley, 996 A.2d 1262 (Del. 2010).

Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision to exclude plaintiff's expert testimony and dismiss her case, due to a lack of evidence of causation. Plaintiff alleged low back and neck injuries as a result of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff proffered one expert for trial, who admitted he was unaware of plaintiff's pre-accident treatment records for both neck and low back injuries, in rendering his causation opinions. The trial court found that plaintiff's expert testimony was inadmissible under Daubert v. Merril Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) and D.R.E. 702(1), for lack of factual knowledge of plaintiff's pre-existing condition. On appeal, plaintiff argued that her expert's lack of accurate knowledge about her pre-existing condition went to weight and credibility, rather than admissibility. However, the Court rejected this argument, reasoning that if an expert's proposed testimony is not based upon "sufficient facts or data," the expert must be disqualified.