Stephen F. English, Abdul Kallon, Renée E. Rothauge and Thomas Tobin | Perkins Coie Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 702, which governs expert testimony in federal court, is getting a facelift. The amended FRE 702 goes into effect later this year. In this Update, we review what has changed, as well as takeaways for litigants… Continue reading Updated Language To Federal Rule Of Evidence 702: What Litigators Should Know
Tag: Federal Rule of Evidence 702
Proposed Changes to Federal Rule of Evidence on Expert Witness Testimony
Marisa T. Darden and Jay Thomas | Squire Patton Boggs Expert testimony can play a crucial role in the trial process. Consequently, parties often file motions to disqualify the opposing side’s expert witnesses. The success of these motions in federal cases is controlled by the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”), which stipulate that expert testimony… Continue reading Proposed Changes to Federal Rule of Evidence on Expert Witness Testimony
Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony
Melissa Kenney | The Subrogation Strategist Many subrogation claims involving fire losses rely heavily on expert testimony. Expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 if it is both relevant and reliable. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), whose standard has been incorporated into Federal Rule of Evidence 702,… Continue reading Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony
Recent Court Order Excluding Expert Testimony Offers Useful Reminders and Lessons for Construction Litigants
Amandeep S. Kahlon | Bradley Arant Boult Cummings Construction claims often feature supporting testimony from design and/or scheduling experts, and exclusion of that testimony either by disqualification of the expert or a finding that the testimony is otherwise inadmissible can prove fatal to your claim or defense. States may vary in their requirements for admissibility… Continue reading Recent Court Order Excluding Expert Testimony Offers Useful Reminders and Lessons for Construction Litigants
Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials
David McLain | Colorado Construction Litigation| October 8, 2019 In 2010, Hansen Construction was sued for construction defects and was defended by three separate insurance carriers pursuant to various primary CGL insurance policies.[i] One of Hansen’s primary carriers, Maxum Indemnity Company, issued two primary policies, one from 2006-2007 and one from 2007-2008. Everest National Insurance Company issued… Continue reading Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials