News & Analysis as of

Daubert Standards Rule of Evidence 702 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

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

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

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

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

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

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 3

In 2013, spurred by the decisions in Marsh and Hood, the Florida Legislature amended F.S. 90.702 to mirror Federal Rule of Evidence 702. In a preamble to the final bill, the Legislature expressed its intent to (1) adopt 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

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

Is the Frye Standard Making a Comeback in Florida?

On July 11, 2017, the Florida Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction of a case in which it is expected to finally decide, conclusively, whether Florida courts are to apply the Frye or Daubert standard to determine admissibility...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