The 2000 amendments to Rule 702 sought to resolve the debate that had emerged in the courts in the 1990s over the proper meaning of Daubert by codifying the rigorous and structured approach to expert admissibility announced in the Daubert trilogy. Fifteen years later, however, the amendments have only partially accomplished this objective. Many courts continue to resist the judiciary’s proper gatekeeping role, either by ignoring Rule 702’s mandate altogether or by aggressively reinterpreting the Rule’s provisions. Informed by this additional history of recalcitrance, the time has come for the Judicial Conference to return to the drafting table and finish the job it began in 2000. Rule 702 should be amended to secure the promise of Daubert a...
In this essay, I will offer some thoughts on how we might reframe the issues governing the admissibi...
Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use ...
Probability for expert opinions is the correct standard for civil cases based on the preponderance o...
This Article reviews the history of the evolution of the rules for the admissibility of expert testi...
This Article highlights lingering confusion in the caselaw as to the proper standard for the trial c...
The Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. laid down the standard for admissi...
A recent report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology questioned the vali...
The problem with expert evidence is not the inappropriateness of the Daubert approach. The narrow fo...
The controversy over the proper standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence is an argument...
In the United States, Federal Rules of Evidence 702, the Frye and Daubert standards govern the admis...
The Supreme Court’s trilogy of evidence cases, Daubert, Joiner, and Kumho Tire appear to mark a sign...
In theory, the Daubert reliability standard for the admissibility of expert testimony requires the j...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and subsequent revi...
In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States S...
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory r...
In this essay, I will offer some thoughts on how we might reframe the issues governing the admissibi...
Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use ...
Probability for expert opinions is the correct standard for civil cases based on the preponderance o...
This Article reviews the history of the evolution of the rules for the admissibility of expert testi...
This Article highlights lingering confusion in the caselaw as to the proper standard for the trial c...
The Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. laid down the standard for admissi...
A recent report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology questioned the vali...
The problem with expert evidence is not the inappropriateness of the Daubert approach. The narrow fo...
The controversy over the proper standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence is an argument...
In the United States, Federal Rules of Evidence 702, the Frye and Daubert standards govern the admis...
The Supreme Court’s trilogy of evidence cases, Daubert, Joiner, and Kumho Tire appear to mark a sign...
In theory, the Daubert reliability standard for the admissibility of expert testimony requires the j...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and subsequent revi...
In reaching its recent decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States S...
In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory r...
In this essay, I will offer some thoughts on how we might reframe the issues governing the admissibi...
Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court decided one of the most important cases concerning the use ...
Probability for expert opinions is the correct standard for civil cases based on the preponderance o...