News & Analysis as of

Litigation Strategies › Rule of Evidence 702 › Daubert Standards

Stark & Stark

Court Affirms Admissibility of DTI-Based TBI Diagnosis in Oklahoma Federal Case

Stark & Stark on

In a significant decision for plaintiffs litigating traumatic brain injury (TBI) claims, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma has denied a defense motion to exclude expert testimony based on diffusion...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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

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

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

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

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP

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

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP on

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

4 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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide