News & Analysis as of

Federal Rules of Evidence Expert Testimony

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

Safeguarding the Courtroom from AI-Generated Evidence: Federal Rule of Evidence 707 Approved by Judicial Conference

On June 10, 2025, the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure — the advisory body to the Judicial Conference of the United States — approved several key amendments to the Federal Rules, including the creation of a new...more

Irwin IP LLP

Unreliable Expert Testimony Shall Not Pass 

Irwin IP LLP on

On May 21, 2025, the Federal Circuit en banc banished the notion that the reliability of an expert’s methodology under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (“Rule 702”) is a question of weight, not admissibility. The en banc Court...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Proposed Rule 707 Targets AI-Crafted Evidence

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Artificial Intelligence is taking society by storm and has even made a name for itself in the courtroom. With the ease of utilizing AI to generate various forms of data, presenting evidence at trial can be a much less arduous...more

White & Case LLP

Federal Circuit Tightens Standard for Patent Damages Experts

White & Case LLP on

On May 21, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, highlighting the critical gatekeeping role of district courts under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert standards,...more

Fish & Richardson

En Banc Federal Circuit Grants Google a New Trial in EcoFactor Case

Fish & Richardson on

On May 21, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, released its opinion in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google, LLC. In an 8-2 decision, the court reversed a $20 million jury verdict, holding that the...more

White and Williams LLP

New Jersey Court Pumps the Brakes on Product Liability Lawsuit

White and Williams LLP on

In Wang v. Maserati N. Am., Inc., C.A. No. 23-2402, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61446, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (District Court) considered the admissibility of the opinions of plaintiffs’...more

Butler Snow LLP

Turning Up the Heat? Pressure Testing Scientific Theories in Science Days, Rule 702 Hearings, and the Hot Tub

Butler Snow LLP on

Identifying junk science is merely the first step of the battle when considering argument approach and courtroom strategy. With this in mind, the main goals are to keep junk science out of the courtroom and, of course, win...more

Zelle  LLP

Federal District Court Holds Engineer Is Qualified Enough, and His Methods Are Reliable Enough, to Testify to Date Wind and Hail...

Zelle LLP on

In Wings Platinum, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co., No. 3:23-CV-2145-D, 2025 WL 391388 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 4, 2025), a federal district court recently held that an engineer with one year and one month of experience...more

White and Williams LLP

No Expert Testimony for You: Maryland Federal Court Deems Expert Testimony Inadmissible

White and Williams LLP on

The plaintiff, Whitney Rich, on behalf of C.W., brought this action after her young infant, C.W., suffered severe burns from a bathtub in their rental property. The plaintiff alleged that the landlord, Marilyn L. Dennison...more

Morgan Lewis

Expert Testimony May Be Limited if ‘Confidential’ Information Is Withheld Under Section 6103

Morgan Lewis on

Expert witnesses can be critical to defending a tax position—but what happens when an expert must maintain confidentiality over information that is important to their analysis? Preserving this confidentiality while ensuring a...more

Rumberger | Kirk

No Sea Changes to See Here in 2023 Amendment to Rule 702

Rumberger | Kirk on

New Amendment Reiterates and Reinforces the Existing Standard for Admissibility of Expert Testimony - On December 1, 2023, the United States Supreme Court adopted the Rules Committee’s proposed Amendment to the Federal...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

What Have We Learned From the First Six Months Under the New Federal Rule of Evidence 702?

As patent practitioners know, Daubert motions can be some of the most hotly contested and pivotal motions in the life of a patent case. These motions are used to exclude testimony from an opponent's expert witness, usually on...more

Benesch

With the Federal Rule of Evidence 702 Amendment in Place, Federal Courts Issue Rulings in Conformity with the Changes, and...

Benesch on

It has now been over six months since the amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 regarding the admissibility of expert testimony went into effect on Dec. 1, 2023....more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Peer Review Can’t Save “Junk Science” from FRE 702 Judicial Gatekeeping – In re: Roundup Court Excludes Expert Whose Opinions Had...

When tasked with assessing the admissibility of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, courts often cite the so-called Daubert factors as criteria that guide the inquiry. Among those factors is “whether the...more

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

"If You Most Know, You Know”: Expert Testimony That “Most” Drug Couriers Know They’re Carrying Drugs Allowed to...

If you know, you know. The government’s less familiar version — if most know, the defendant knows — just got a boost from the Supreme Court of the United States, which recently held that Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) did...more

Miller Canfield

Junk Science or Relevant Evidence: Supreme Court Says Experts May Now Aid in Determining Criminal Intent

Miller Canfield on

In criminal cases, oftentimes the most significant element in dispute is whether the defendant harbored the intent to “knowingly” or “willfully” violate the criminal law at issue.  If the defendant denies that he knew what he...more

Benesch

U.S. Supreme Court Allows Prosecutors a Game-Changing Weapon: Broad Expert Testimony on Criminal Intent

Benesch on

Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) provides that experts in criminal cases cannot state an opinion about the defendant’s mens rea. That is, the expert must not state an opinion about “whether the defendant did or did not have a...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Not the Day We Are Waiting For - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

With a significant mass of cases left to decide and only a few weeks to issue the opinions, the U.S. Supreme Court has reduced the backlog by four yesterday. None of them, however, resolves the future of Chevron deference or...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Diaz v. United States

On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Diaz v. United States, No. 23-14, holding an expert’s opinion that “most people” in the defendant’s situation have a particular mental state is not an inadmissible opinion...more

McManis Faulkner

The New Daubert Standard: Implications of Amended FRE 702

McManis Faulkner on

In December of 2023, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 was amended. This provision is commonly known as the Daubert standard. The Advisory Comments state the amendment is only intended to clarify the standard and promote...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Important Changes to Rule 702 and Expert Testimony

McGuireWoods LLP on

The federal rule of evidence governing expert testimony — Rule 702 — just saw its most significant change in almost 25 years. The new Rule 702, which went into effect Dec. 1, 2023, gives litigants important new tools for...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

National Mass Torts: 2023 Year in Review

Sixth Circuit Rejects Overly Ambitious PFAS Class Action - Hardwick v. 3M Co. (In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours), No. 22-3765, 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. Nov. 27, 2023) - The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit...more

Carlton Fields

Federal Rule Amendment Clarifies Requirements for Admitting Expert Testimony

Carlton Fields on

On December 1, 2023, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 was amended to “clarify and emphasize” that, before expert witness testimony can be admitted, the proponent must satisfy all the rule’s requirements by a preponderance of the...more

Frantz Ward LLP

Just What I Wanted for the Holidays: Changes to the Federal Rules of Evidence

Frantz Ward LLP on

There is an adage that lawyers learn the version of the rules of evidence and procedure that are current when they are in law school and then do not look at them again. While that is (hopefully) an exaggeration, it is always...more

Adams & Reese

Clarifying the District Court’s “Gatekeeping” Responsibility

Adams & Reese on

Recent Amendments to the Rules Governing Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Federal Rule of Evidence 702 - In litigation, everything ultimately boils down to proof; that is, how the parties prove their claims and defenses....more

58 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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