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
Expert testimony is the tool that enables litigators to elucidate concepts that require scientific, technical or specialized knowledge. However, a proponent cannot introduce expert testimony without demonstrating under F.R.E....more
On November 15, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court released its decision on the much anticipated issue of whether Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) testimony is admissible under New Jersey Rule of Evidence 702. The Court...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
If you don’t know where a line is, you can’t say whether someone has crossed it. That principle applies in spades to expert witnesses, particularly when their role in the case calls on them to help the jury understand where...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
Discovery deadlines exist for a reason. Although there are exceptions to every rule – and often a rule dictating how to handle such exceptions – litigants in federal court are expected to show their evidentiary cards in a...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
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
Litigators! Substantive amendments have been proposed to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The public comment period closes February 16. Rule 702 was last amended substantively in 2000, soon after the concluding chapter in...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
On April 22, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit found in Moore v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00056-LAG (11th Cir. April 22, 2021), that a surgeon serving as an expert who had not used the...more
The Eleventh Circuit recently reinstated a case alleging a surgical tool caused internal burns during a hysterectomy surgery, holding that the district court erred in disqualifying an expert on the basis that he had never...more
In the face of extraordinary challenges, 2020 has yielded profound developments within the scientific community: from the accelerated development and approval of highly effective and safe vaccines normally years in the making...more
The Court of Appeals stepped in for Hollywood last week to make sure Marylanders (or, at least, Maryland litigators) did not go the whole summer without a blockbuster. In Rochkind v. Stevenson II (“Stevenson II”), Judge...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
In In re: Accutane Litigation (A-4952-16T1) — an appeal decided just 10 days after oral argument — the New Jersey Appellate Division applied the New Jersey Supreme Court’s landmark decision In re Accutane Litigation, 234 N.J....more
Amateur philosophers, bar flies, and eulogists, among others, are known to wistfully observe that nothing dies so long as it is remembered and discussed. That’s a comforting sentiment when it comes to loved ones and legacies,...more
Seven months ago, the Florida Supreme Court declined to adopt Daubert as the standard for admitting expert testimony in Florida state courts. In DeLisle v. Crane Co., 258 So. 3d 1219 (2018), the court reaffirmed that “Frye,...more
The steady but sometimes slow adoption by the states of the Daubert standard for expert admissibility, and the accompanying recession of the Frye standard, is something of a coming of age for the national jurisprudence. Frye...more
Prior to 1993, federal and state courts used the standard enunciated in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), to determine whether scientific evidence should be admitted at a trial. ...more