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
In addition to believable witnesses and compelling arguments, evidence is what can help win cases at trial. An item of evidence introduced in a courtroom proceeding is known as an exhibit, and there are several types of...more
This CLE webinar will discuss the issue of allegations of supposed "parental alienation" and offer guidance for handling a case involving such allegations in court. The panel will discuss the term "parental alienation," why...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
The amended language of Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony in federal court, takes effect on December 1, 2023. Even though the Advisory Committee comment stresses that it...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
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
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
Understanding How and Why "Settlement Negotiations" May Be Used Against You - To promote honest and open discussions in resolving disputes, courts have adopted rules to specifically safeguard the information disclosed and...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
During trial, lawyers make many strategic decisions to try to appeal to a jury. For example, they consider not only the substance of the evidence they present, but also the emotional impact of that evidence. But the impact...more
No. An expert cannot merely reiterate, vouch for, or bolster the opinions of someone else, as this is improper and inadmissible. Ark. R. Evid. 702; Food, Inc. v. Indus. Risk Insurers, No. 5:13-CV-05204, 2015 WL 12914256, at...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
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 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
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
On October 15, 2018, the Supreme Court of Florida invalidated the 2013 legislative changes to the Florida Evidence Code that adopted the modern Daubert standard for admissibility of expert testimony, returning Florida to the...more
On August 1, the Supreme Court of New Jersey issued a seminal ruling elucidating the state’s standard for admission of expert testimony in civil litigation. In a unanimous decision, the Court adopted the Daubert factors for...more
On August 1, 2018, the Supreme Court of New Jersey effectively ended more than 2,000 Accutane lawsuits when it reversed an Appellate Division panel decision that had reversed a trial court’s exclusion of plaintiffs’ expert...more
On March 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of Florida heard argument in a case that presents the Court with an opportunity to resolve whether Frye or Daubert will be the governing standard for admission of expert testimony going...more
January 10, 2018 UPDATE: The Supreme Court of Florida has scheduled oral argument in the case for March 6, 2018, at 9:00 a.m The Supreme Court of Florida is poised to decide the constitutionality of the Daubert standard...more
The Supreme Court of Florida is poised to decide the constitutionality the Daubert standard for admissibility of expert testimony, resolving whether Frye or Daubert will be the governing standard going forward in Florida...more
On March 28, 2017, Missouri Governor Eric Greitens signed House Bill 153 into law, repealing Section 490.065 RSMo governing the admissibility of expert witness opinion testimony and replacing it with provisions mirroring the...more
Two recent federal cases highlight the challenges practitioners face in presenting expert claims handling testimony in bad faith litigation under the Daubert standard. In the first case, a court excluded such expert testimony...more