The Mold Warrior Defeated (Again)

Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker is a Maryland physician who is board certified in the field of family medicine. He became a national "expert" on behalf of plaintiffs in mold cases, testifying across the Country that individuals suffered from "chronic biotoxin associated illness" as a result of mold exposure.

When Dr. Shoemaker's opinions were first excluded by a Florida court, he responded by questioning the judiciary's role in evaluating scientific evidence in his 2005 book, Mold Warriors.

Perhaps proving that judges don't like to be criticized, Dr. Shoemaker's record in Court has gotten worse.

On September 15, 2008, Dr. Shoemaker was again excluded, this time by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (Racic v. Chana LLC).

The Racic decision cites at least four other cases from [both] state and federal courts where Dr. Shoemaker's opinions were rejected, all on the grounds that his methods and views are not generally accepted.

In our experience, once an "expert" has been subject to enough exclusions that Courts simply rely on the prior rulings in excluding him again, his career as an expert witness is done.

We won't be surprised if the mold warrior retires from the battlefield.

Source: Legal research and www.wshblaw.com/pictures/2009%20Annual%20Mold%20Litigation%20Update.pdf

THE SITE CONTRIBUTORS NEITHER SUPPORT NOR OPPOSE THIS MATERIAL. INDEED, THEY BELIEVE MYCOTOXINS ARE NOT SAFE IN INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS.

ONE SHOULD USE EXPERTS WITH A WIDE RANGE OF RESEARCH AND WHO ALSO USES ARGUMENTS FROM MANY WIDE SOURCES, AND NOT PRIMARILY THE WITNESSES OWN MATERIALS OR PROTOCOLS TO BE ACCEPTED IN COURTS. THIS MIGHT BE THE REASON SOME JUDGES FEEL THIS FAMILY MD IS NOT ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL IN COURTS.

NO OPINION IS OFFERED AS TO THE REASON'S FOR THIS PERSON'S REJECTION AS AN EXPERT. 34,000 ARTICLES EXIST ON MYCOTOXINS, SO WHY USE AN APPROACH OR A PERSON THAT HAS FAILED AT TIMES?