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 a toxic tort case, plaintiffs must establish general causation. If a substance is incapable of causing the type of injury plaintiff claims, then it certainly didn’t cause theirs. Under Texas law, toxic tort plaintiffs must...more
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
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
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
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 - The admission of expert testimony in federal courts is governed by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Effective December 1, 2023, Rule 702 was amended to clarify the “preponderance of...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
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
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
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
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
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) requires retained expert witnesses to provide an expert report which gives “a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for them.” Fed. R....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 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