News & Analysis as of

Daubert Standards Admissibility Rule of Evidence 702

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

To Depose or Not to Depose: When Challenging Opposing Nonretained Experts Becomes Challenging

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) requires parties to disclose the opinions of experts who may present evidence at trial. If the disclosures are inadequate, Rule 37(c) requires exclusion of the opinions “unless the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Northern District of Illinois Holds that Seventh Circuit Precedent is Incompatible with Rule 702 as Amended

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Old Habits Die Hard: First Circuit Cites Newly Amended Language of FRE 702 But Follows Abrogated Precedent Instead

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Amended FRE 702 Arrives in MDL Practice: S.D.N.Y. Excludes Plaintiffs’ Experts in Acetaminophen MDL

The Committee Notes to the newly implemented amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 make clear that the “[j]udicial gatekeeping” of expert evidence is “essential.” Federal courts in New York have played an important role...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Something to Celebrate: A Brief Guide to the FRE 702 Amendments

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

IMS Legal Strategies

Working with Experts Under the New 702 Rule

IMS Legal Strategies on

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Experts Who Cannot Articulate a Standard Cannot Opine that a Defendant Failed to Meet the Standard

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Courts Are Citing the Rule 702 Amendments – And Litigants Should, Too

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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Court Allows Expert Testimony Regarding Measured Mile Analysis Comparing Work on Different Projects

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

IMS Legal Strategies

Working with Experts after Proposed 702 Rule Changes

IMS Legal Strategies on

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

Epstein Becker & Green

One Step Closer to a Revised Standard for the Admissibility of Expert Testimony Under Rule 702

Epstein Becker & Green on

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

It’s not what happened, but why: First Circuit rejects conclusory, unsupported expert opinions

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

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP

Doctors, Scientists, & Engineers - Oh My! Changes to Federal Rule 702 are Likely Coming

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Rule 702 Toolbox: Proposed Amendments Seek to Reset the Application of FRE 702

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

Freeman Law

Expert Witnesses and the Daubert Standard

Freeman Law on

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

Butler Snow LLP

Solving the Problem of Daubert’s “Shaky but Admissible Evidence”: An Amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 May Be Forthcoming

Butler Snow LLP on

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

Womble Bond Dickinson

Science Should Lead the Law: Amending FRE 702 to Let Science Guide Legal Outcomes

Womble Bond Dickinson on

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

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

No Amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, At Least For Now

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Whither Roberti? The Cockroach Precedent - An Exercise in Magical, Wishful Thinking

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Growing Pains: The Story Behind Florida’s Daubert Arc – Part 2

The Aftermath of Marsh - When the Marsh case was decided in 2007 its broad interpretation of the “pure opinion exception” and narrow vision of the role of Frye took Florida expert evidence admissibility law well out of the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Growing Pains: The Story Behind Florida’s Daubert Arc – Part 1

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

21 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide