Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 281: Listen and Learn -- Character Evidence
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 121: Listen and Learn -- Character Evidence
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 259: Listen and Learn -- Relevance in Evidence
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 91: Listen and Learn -- Logical and Legal Relevance
The US Supreme Court decided several criminal procedure cases during the 2023 – 2024 term – including Diaz v. United States, 144 S. Ct. 1727 (2024) and Smith v. Arizona, 144 S. Ct. 1785 (2024) – which have relevance and...more
As we reported in April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified a question on California’s Learned Intermediary Doctrine in Himes v. Somatics, LLC, 2022 WL 989469 (9th Cir. Apr. 1, 2022). The...more
In explaining the December 2023 amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Advisory Committee called out several ways in which “many courts” had “incorrectly” applied Rule 702 and failed to adequately discharge their...more
The longer and more frequently a principle is repeated by the courts, the more difficult it can be for courts to acknowledge change. As illustrated by the First Circuit’s opinion in Rodriguez v. Hospital San Cristobal, Inc.,...more
Fun fact: There are 23 holidays that can be celebrated today, December 1st. Some, like Rosa Parks Day and World AIDS Day, are solemn and serious. Others are silly and fun, like National Peppermint Bark Day and National...more
Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence governs expert witness testimony in federal courts. On April 24, 2023, the United States Supreme Court approved an amendment to Rule 702 (the “Amendment”), which will go into effect...more
On June 7, 2022, the Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure approved amendments to several of the Federal Rules of Evidence—including Rule 702, which governs the admissibility of expert witness...more
Though the pending amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 have not taken effect officially yet, courts already have begun to cite them. Early signs indicate the potential that, consistent with the comments by the Advisory...more
Loss of productivity damages are commonly estimated using a “measured mile” analysis, which compares unimpacted construction work to work which has been disrupted to determine the cost impact of the disruption. Such analyses...more
Peer-reviewed literature can be a powerful tool in attacking an opposing expert’s opinions. A solid, on-point article can do more than merely satisfy several of the so-called Daubert factors for assessing reliability – by...more
The Judicial Conference of the United States’ Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure seems poised to advance proposed amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, after the Advisory Committee on Evidence unanimously...more
In personal injury and wrongful death cases, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving medical causation, which almost universally requires testimony from a competent expert. Some plaintiffs offer testimony from forensic...more
It is not uncommon for an opposing expert to opine that the existence of injury alone implies negligence, nor is it unusual to find that such opinions are supported only by general reliance on “literature” with no discernible...more
A plaintiff who alleges that a product is defective usually has to offer expert testimony in support of that allegation. This should come as no surprise for complex products – if it took a team of scientists and engineers to...more
ase In the wake of March Madness, it is only appropriate to call attention to an opinion laced with pithy basketball puns. In Nachimovsky v. Nike, Inc. et al., 2022 WL 943421 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2022), Plaintiff injured his...more
Federal Rule of Evidence 702—Testimony by Expert Witnesses—was promulgated in 1975 when Congress first enacted the Federal Rules of Evidence. Original Rule 702 simply stated that “[i]f scientific, technical, or other...more
This week, the Ninth Circuit addresses the district court’s gatekeeping role for expert testimony and examines whether federal courts have jurisdiction over COVID-related suits against nursing homes. ELOSU v. MIDDLEFORK...more
In the space of a single paragraph, General Electric Co. v. Joiner softened Daubert’s comment that a court’s assessment of expert opinion admissibility should focus “solely on principles and methodology, not on the...more
Expert testimony is often critical to establish a claim or defense. Expert testimony is allowed where scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the judge or jury to understand the evidence in a case...more
While we all rely on Google or other internet search engines to find and absorb information quickly these days, a recent decision in the Central District of Illinois highlights the problems for expert witnesses relying on...more
What information aviation experts should be allowed to rely upon in formulating opinions for trial - In a previous article, we discussed the hearsay issues contained in NTSB reports, which can be challenged as inadmissible...more
The Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules will continue this fall its ongoing discussions on amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 702. The two possible amendments being considered for FRE 702 include...more
Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony, was most recently amended in 2000 in response to Daubert and its progeny. In response to concerns about misapplication, the Advisory Committee...more
The Fourth District Court of Appeal recently issued a reminder that Daubert is the standard for all disputes regarding admissibility of expert testimony in Florida, and applies retroactively even where Frye was the standard...more