1 / 8

Admissibility of Expert Testimony

Admissibility of Expert Testimony. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if :

ginny
Télécharger la présentation

Admissibility of Expert Testimony

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Admissibility of Expert Testimony

  2. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals • A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: • (a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; • (b) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; • (c) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and • (d) The expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

  3. Specialized Knowledge • May be a function of advanced training • May be a reflection of acquiring information that is difficult to get

  4. Sufficient Facts of Data • Are the data representative? • Do the data support the conclusions drawn

  5. Reliable Principles or Methods • Is there evidence that the methods used produce your findings are reliable and accurate

  6. Evaluating Daubert Criteria • Has the technique been tested in actual field conditions (and not just in a laboratory)? [e.g. fingerprinting has been extensively tested and verified not only in laboratory conditions, but even in actual criminal cases. So it is admissible. Polygraphy on the other hand has been well tested in laboratories but not so well tested in field conditions] • Has the technique been subject to peer review and publication? • What is the known or potential rate of error? • Do standards exist for the control of the technique's operation? • Has the technique been generally accepted within the relevant scientific community

  7. Expert Statistical Testimony • Are the data reliable and sufficient • Has an accepted method been used to analyze the data • Are the standards used to evaluate the data (e.g., statistical significance) widely accepted in the scientific community

  8. Attacking Expert Statistical Testimony • The data are no good • The expert is no good • The wrong method was used • The method was OK, but the question being asked is the wrong one

More Related