News & Analysis as of

Daubert Standards Expert Witness

McDermott Will & Emery

En Banc Federal Circuit Cools Damages Award Because of Improper Expert Testimony

McDermott Will & Emery on

In an en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court abused its discretion by admitting testimony from a damages expert that a lump-sum...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC Probes the Limits for Gatekeeping Damages Testimony

Last week, in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the Federal Circuit issued its first en banc decision in a utility patent case in several years. The case involves the gatekeeping function of district courts vis-à-vis expert...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Foundation, Not Façade — The Fifth Circuit Affirms the Proper Basis Requirement for Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Newsome v....

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

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

Medical and Life Sciences: New York 2024 Year in Review

From medical devices to OTC drugs, preemption to expert preclusion, New York state and federal courts issued decisions in 2024 which further shaped the landscape in the medical and life sciences legal world. To prepare the...more

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

Can a Treating Physician’s Medical Testimony Be “Lay Opinion”? Divided Sixth Circuit Panel Disagrees on Where to Draw the Line

Federal Rules of Evidence 701 and 702 govern the admissibility of lay and expert opinion testimony, respectively, in federal courts. Rule 701(c) helps paint the line between the two, providing that an opinion “based on...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Expert Need Not Have Acquired the Requisite Skill Level Prior to the Time of the Invention

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Federal Circuit Lays Out When Expert Witnesses in Patent Litigation Must Have Required Expertise

Fenwick & West LLP on

In patent litigation, expert witnesses play a crucial role in providing specialized knowledge to the court. In a recent case where Osseo Imaging LLC sued Planmeca USA Inc. for patent infringement, the Federal Circuit...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Junk Science in the Courtroom: Prevention is Better than Cure

Womble Bond Dickinson on

When scientific evidence is in play, it is often assumed that the most frequently cited articles are published in the most elite journals. However, this is not necessarily true. A journal is ranked according to its impact...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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Plaintiffs’ Second Bite at the General Causation Apple Fares No Better Than the First in Acetaminophen MDL

In December 2023, back when the ink was still drying on the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Southern District of New York excluded all five general causation experts proffered by plaintiffs in the In re...more

Goodwin

Opening the Black Box of Generative AI: Explainability in Bankruptcy Cases

Goodwin on

US courts are issuing guidelines to ensure litigators disclose any use of generative AI in legal proceedings. By now, most of us have heard a story about the misuse of generative AI in the practice of law: the attorney...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Expert on Proxy Statement Disclosures Excluded Under Daubert

Troutman Pepper Locke on

A recent decision by Judge Novak in a securities case provides some helpful reminders on expert witness practice, particularly in commercial litigation, in the EDVA....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

Troutman Pepper Locke

EDVA Judge Allows Pension Investment Expert to Testify in Class Action ERISA Case

Troutman Pepper Locke on

A recent decision by Senior District Judge Robert Payne on a Daubert motion in class action litigation against a pension fund offers some helpful lessons on challenging expert witnesses in the EDVA. Trauernicht v. Genworth...more

Marshall Dennehey

Rule 702 Revamped Once Again

Marshall Dennehey on

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

Genova Burns LLC

New Jersey Supreme Court Rules Drug Recognition Expert Testimony Admissible Under the Daubert-Accutane Standard

Genova Burns LLC on

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

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

Carlton Fields

Rough Waters in the Expert “Hot Tub” - Court Throws Class Expert Overboard in Google Play Store Litigation

Carlton Fields on

One notable opportunity associated with antitrust class action practice is the expert “hot tub,” which generally speaking is an in-court, on-the-record “debate” between dueling economists, with the court, parties, and experts...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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Court Finds Ship Has Sailed for Seaman to Disclose Expert’s Opinions, Resulting in Summary Judgment

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

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Zantac Rule 702 Order: TLBR (Too Long, But Read)

On opening an opinion, lawyers habitually roll their eyes when they see a table of contents. Even more so when they learn the opinion is over 300 pages. The MDL order granting defense motions to exclude experts and for...more

Stark & Stark

Another Favorable DTI Decision

Stark & Stark on

​​​​​​​Another favorable DTI decision has been made in Meadors v. D’Agostino, a case from the United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana (October 29, 2020). This case arose out of a car crash where the...more

87 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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