
	Where results make sense

Topic: Daubert motion

Related Topics

Expert witness

Witness

John Smeaton

	Daubert Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The Daubert Standard is a legal precedent set in 1993 by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses' testimony during legal proceedings.
		Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. Daubert motion is a motion, raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury.
		The Daubert decision was heralded by many observers as one of the most important Supreme Court decisions of the last century imparting crucial legal reforms to reduce the volume of what has disparagingly been labeled junk science in the court room.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Daubert_Standard (1447 words)

	interFIRE, A site dedicated to improving fire investigation worldwide.
		Daubert was a case alleging that severe birth defects in a child had been caused by a mother's use of Bendectin, a "morning sickness" drug, during her pregnancy.
		He noted that in Daubert there were 22 amicus ("friend of the court") briefs filed by interested groups and individuals, many of which dealt with issues completely unrelated to the law, such as the definition and meaning of "scientific knowledge", "the scientific method", "scientific validity", and "peer review".
		Daubert addresses the standards to be applied by a trial judge when faced with a proffer of expert scientific testimony based upon a novel theory or methodology.
	www.interfire.org /features/fsi_daubert_challenge.asp (5362 words)

	interFIRE, A site dedicated to improving fire investigation worldwide.
		Daubert was a case involving birth defects allegedly cause by the mother's use of Bendectin, an anti-nausea drug, during her pregnancy.
		In support of its motion, Merrill-Dow submitted the affidavit of a physician and epidemiologist, Dr. Steven H. Lamm, who was a respected authority in the area of health risks from exposure to chemical substances.
		While the Supreme Court's ruling in Daubert was specifically directed at the admissibility of certain scientific evidence, the plaintiffs have not directed the Court's attention to a single case in which a court has refused to apply Daubert to a "technical analysis".
	www.interfire.org /res_file/daubert.asp (5057 words)

	Falsifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		It was also enshrined in United States law as part of the Daubert Standard set by the Supreme Court for whether scientific evidence is admissible in a jury trial.
		In the philosophy of science, verificationism (also known as the verifiability theory of meaning) held that a statement must be in principle empirically verifiable in order to be both meaningful and scientific.
		Isaac Newton's laws of motion in their original form were thus falsified by experiments in the twentieth century (eg, the anomaly of the motion of Mercury, the slightly skewed behavior of light passing sufficiently close to a star, etc), and replaced by a theory which was consistent with those phenomena, general relativity.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Falsifiable (4249 words)

	DAUBERT
		Believing that Daubert was limited to the scientific context, the court held that the Daubert factors did not apply to Carlson's testimony, which it characterized as skill- or experience-based.
		Daubert referred only to "scientific" knowledge because that was the nature of the expertise there at issue.
		Thus, whether Daubert's specific factors are, or are not, reasonable measures of reliability in a particular case is a matter that the law grants the trial judge broad latitude to determine.
	www.lapda.org /daubert.htm (16216 words)

	[No title]
		Daubert II noted that an important consideration in determining admissibility of expert scientific testimony is whether the expert is proposing to testify about matters growing naturally and directly out of research they have conducted independent of litigation, or whether they have developed their opinions expressly for purposes of testifying at trial.
		Motion was made in the case of Chapter 11 debtor, the manufacturer of asbestos-containing floor tile, to exclude expert opinions and other evidence on grounds that it failed to meet the standards of scientific reliability and validity mandated by the Supreme Court's Daubert decision.
		On buyer's motion to exclude testimony of four expert witnesses, the District Court, Enslen, J., held that proposed expert testimony as to scope of the inspection agreement and age or cause of corrosion on the plane was inadmissible.
	www.hklaw.com /daubertmotion.htm (7743 words)

	Champion (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-02)
		In Daubert, the court identified five factors that could be considered by the trial court in determining whether the proffered expert testimony was sufficiently reliable to be put before the jury.
		Although the motion was denied, the defendant presented the very same evidence to the jury, including displaying the photographs that had been produced at the Daubert hearing as contrasted to those used at the trial of Sacco and Venzetti reproduced in Hatcher's text.
		Thus, a court faced with a Daubert motion concerning toolmark identification evidence cannot, as Judge Pollak did in the Plaza case with respect to fingerprints, simply take judicial notice of the uniqueness and permanence of toolmarks on firearms which might be used to identify a cartridge or casing cycled through them.
	www.law-forensic.com /daubert_ballistics.htm (7135 words)

	Amicus Brief in Gundaker
		In Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Exclude and their Memorandum Regarding the Propriety of a Preliminary Hearing, they argue that testing evidence is admissible under Rules 402 and 403 and that ultimately the question of whether the testing evidence is credible is one for the factfinder.
		Applying Daubert to fact evidence, such as the testimony of testers who testify about their experiences with rental or sale agents, is inconsistent with the plain language of Rule 702, as well as the rationale underlying Daubert.
		The specific issue in Daubert was the admissibility of testimony from a physician and epidemiologist, and other experts on risks from exposure to various chemical substances, on the question of whether a particular drug caused birth defects.
	www.usdoj.gov /crt/housing/documents/gundaker1.htm (3070 words)

	[No title]
		If the Government fails to give such notice and disclose the underlying data or information that their expert relied on in part or in whole, then such testimony should be excluded or a reasonable continuance be given to the defense to review such material.
		In this cause the Government has previously failed at a Daubert hearing to satisfy the District Court as to their proposed expert and the evidence produced by the equipment used to perform the drug analysis.
		Daubert hearing indicated that the computerized spectral library on the testing equipment produced at least 5 compound matches on a test substance from the FTIR and 7 best matches from the GCMS.
	www.dcfpd.org /motions/alaska/exclude/drugid.htm (5274 words)

	Daubert and the Law and Science of Expert Testimony in Business Litigation
		This condition on the cost of the motion is almost always met, and usually by many (perhaps nine and a half) hundreds of thousands of dollars, making the Daubert motion what those financial analysts (and more importantly, your sophisticated clients) call a positive net present value project (hereinafter a "positive NPV project").
		The beautiful intellectual irony in this is that, modeled in this way, the Daubert motion is shown to be a positive NPV strategy that is precisely symmetric to the positive NPV strategy that incentivized the junk litigation in the first place.
		To see that a Daubert motion can be worth $10 million, just compare the junk-litigation model of the received doctrine to the junk-litigation-with-Daubert model and compare their outcomes.
	www.daubertexpert.com /experts.html (1597 words)

	[No title]
		The next motion that we have 15 is the Defendants' Daubert Motion to exclude testimony of Joseph 16 Landolph.
		My tentative is to grant the motion 5 because it appears that this any dose is outside of the 6 scientific acceptable community weight of opinions.
		And they have 17 to engage under Daubert in all the other cases in some 18 independent evaluation to assess the reliability of the data 19 that they are relying on.
	www.cappellonoel.com /news/boeing081805hearing.txt (13945 words)

	Daubert Links
		Court ruled from the bench that the defense motion was denied; admitted fingerprint evidence and permitted the fingerprint expert to testify to the identification.
		Court indicated from the bench that the defense motion would be denied and to admit fingerprint evidence and permit the fingerprint expert to testify to the identification.
		The defense motion to suppress the fingerprint evidence was denied.
	onin.com /fp/daubert_links3.html (3995 words)

	Tactics Tips
		Consequently, in the federal courts and most state courts it behooves the proponent of the evidence to lay a foundation, even if no objection or Daubert motion to exclude is made by the opposition at the time of the evidence being received, or the trial court admits the opinion without sufficient foundation in the record..
		The Eighth Circuit panel held that Marley’s motion for judgment as a matter of law should have been granted because the testimony of Weisgram’s expert witnesses, the sole evidence supporting the product defect charge, was speculative and not shown to be scientifically sound, and was therefore incompetent to prove plaintiffs’ case.
		Daubert specifically instructs us, as its fourth "general observations’ for the trial courts that rather than outright exclusion "[Vigorous cross examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction of the burden of proof are the means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence." Daubert, at 596.
	www.bucklin.org /Daub_Tactics.htm (1410 words)

	Metzger Law Group, Practice Concentrated in Toxic Tort and Environmental Litigation, based in Long Beach, CA. (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-02)
		In ruling on a summary judgment motion, a judge does not determine whether a party's evidence is substantial or persuasive, but only determines whether a party has evidence on a disputed issue.
		The typical Daubert motion does not assert that the plaintiff has no evidence on a material issue, but rather contends that the nature or quality of plaintiff's evidence is such that it should not be admitted in evidence.
		One of the most troublesome aspects of the Daubert “gatekeeping” approach is that it places trial courts in the onerous and impractical position of passing judgment on the substantive merits of the scientific or technical theories under girding an expert's opinion.
	www.toxictorts.com /art_demise_mealey.shtml (2352 words)

	PointofLaw.com \| PointOfLaw Forum: Expert batting averages
		A corporation in a civil case will be more likely to shy away from the expense of making a futile Daubert challenge on appeal than a criminal defendant who is not bearing the expense of that challenge.
		Another: a granted Daubert motion is much more likely to be a dispositive factor.
		One cannot meaningfully speak of expert batting averages; any Daubert motion is going to depend on the circumstances of the particular expert report.
	www.pointoflaw.com /archives/000104.php (507 words)

	SCAFO Online Articles
		Accompanying the motion for a Daubert hearing was a statement from Professor James E. Starrs, George Washington University, Washington, DC, in which Starrs stated that he was head of the GWU forensic science program and, as such, he declared that there existed no conclusive documentation to the claim of fingerprint uniqueness and individuality.
		The trial judge agreed to the defense motion for a Daubert hearing and a date for the hearing was set for December 28, 1998.
		A new date for the Daubert hearing was set for April 28, 1999; however, the government had to file a written response to the court by April 19, 1999.
	www.scafo.org /library/150402.html (1857 words)

	Dispatches from the Culture Wars: DI's Dishonest Attacks on Barbara Forrest (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-02)
		The TMLC attorneys made what is known as a Daubert motion to prevent Dr. Forrest from being able to testify at the trial.
		It's called a Daubert motion because the controlling precedent for what type of expert scientific testimony is admissable in court is Daubert v.
		In the Motion, Defendants move the Court to exclude the testimony and expert reports, including the data upon which they are based, of Barbara Forrest, Ph.D., a witness who intends to testify as an expert on behalf of Plaintiffs, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 401, 403, 702, and 703.
	stcynic.com /blog/archives/2005/09/dis_dishonest_attacks_on_barba.php (2031 words)

	01-1197 -- Dodge v. Cotter Corporation -- 04/22/2003
		The district court denied Cotter's motion to exclude several of the Jewett group plaintiffs' experts on the grounds that the testimony was unreliable and inadmissible under Daubert v.
		Cotter's motion for summary judgment on the basis that plaintiffs could not satisfy their burden of demonstrating required levels of exposure to hazardous substances was denied, as was Cotter's motion to exclude expert testimony pursuant to Daubert.
		Concluding that the motion violated local court rules regarding length, the district court returned the motion and accompanying appendix and allowed Cotter to file a revised motion and appendix, neither of which could exceed 20 pages in length.
	www.kscourts.org /ca10/cases/2003/04/01-1197.htm (6588 words)

	01-3049 -- U.S. v. Turner -- 04/02/2002
		He attached to his motion two submissions: a Model Brief questioning the uniqueness of fingerprints, prepared by the Federal Public Defender's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and a National Institute of Justice Solicitation, issued in March 2000, seeking proposals for fingerprint research studies.
		Turner's Daubert motion suggests the district court considered fingerprint evidence an "ordinary case[] where the reliability of an expert's methods is properly taken for granted." Kumho Tire Co.
		Turner's pretrial motion for a Daubert hearing cites various forensic science articles and learned treatises, which, if read by the district court in the course of a hearing, would have satisfied Daubert and paved the way to the admission of Detective McNutt's testimony.
	www.kscourts.org /ca10/cases/2002/04/01-3049.htm (2496 words)

	Daubert and Toxic Torts - How to prepare a Daubert case
		The statistical analysis of the Daubert progeny of cases is interesting because although Frye was considered to be an austere" standard and the Daubert decision was believed to be the beginning of a new period of even morel liberal use of experts in the courtroom, this has not yet been realized.
		It is interesting to note that in the state opinions, Daubert was characterized as a more liberal rule broadening the standard for admissibility, and the Frye rule as more conservative and austere.59 Therefore, as Daubert proves to be the more conservative standard, these states may reconsider their positions.
		Of course, the Daubert petitioner, in submitting a rebuttal expert opinion, must be certain to adhere to the same Daubert criteria as the challenged expert.
	www.cvcsc.com /Articles/daubert.htm (4483 words)

	Hampton Union Local News: Wheelabrator wants sludge case dumped
		GREENLAND — Defendants in the wrongful death lawsuit of Shayne Conner filed a motion for summary judgment, saying there is no way the Class B sludge spread on a field near his home could have caused his death.
		The motion filed by the defense is titled a Daubert motion, named after the precedent-setting U.S. Supreme Court case.
		Essentially, the Daubert case makes a trial judge the "gatekeeper" in terms of the reliability and admissibility of scientific theories and principles.
	www.seacoastonline.com /2001news/hampton/h1_14d.htm (565 words)

	[No title]
		The retrial of Bryan Mitchell was scheduled to begin on November 2, 1998, again in Philadelphia, but on October 27,1998, attorneys for Mitchell filed a motion requesting that a Daubert hearing be conducted on the finger--print evidence.
		In a Daubert hearing, the usual exclusionary rule of a trial is not applied to hearing witnesses.
		While this challenge to the validity of fingerprints under the Daubert criteria is limited to how fingerprints may be admitted in federal courts, there is an obvious concern by all as to the outcome.
	www.geocities.com /cfpdlab/daubert.html (1838 words)

	INDEPENDENT EXPERTS IN TOXIC TORT AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-02)
		The motion to appoint an independent panel of experts may be brought as the opening motion educating the court about the science, well before there is any preliminary hearing pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a) or other state requirements.
		The motion for independent experts may also precede, or follow, dispositive motions challenging the science.
		The purpose of the court-appointed expert is not so much to become a witness in the trial itself, but to test and screen for the judge the statements and opinions of the experts who do propose to testify.
	abanet.org /environ/committees/toxictorts/newsletter/aug00/cwik.html (2268 words)

	Firm Articles - Law Firm Short Jenkins Kamin, LLP Attorneys Houston, Texas
		Outline for Effective Arguments and Counter Arguments in a Motion to Lift a Domicile Restriction (with Earl S. Lilly), Gulf Coast Family Law Specialists, 1998.
		Motions in Limine, Advanced Family Law Drafting Course, State Bar of Texas, 1990.
		Daubert Examination of a Psychological Expert, Annual Trial Institute, Texas Academy of Family Law Specialists, 1998.
	www.short-jenkins.com /CM/Custom/Firm-Articles.asp (3532 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)