Showing results 1-3 of 3.
Cases using phrasing similar to:
"Under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert, expert testimony is admissible if (1) the expert is qualified to testify competently, (2) the expert has used sufficiently reliable methodology in reaching a conclusion, and (3) the testimony will assist the trier of fact."
The Daubert Court set out four nonexclusive factors that should be considered by a trial court assessing the reliability of expert scientific testimony under Rule 702:(1) whether the theory or technique can be and has been tested; (2) whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review; (3) whether the technique has a high known or potential rate of error; and (4) whether the theory has gained general acceptance within the scientific community. ... Daubert also requires a special inquiry into relevance, calling on the trial court to ensure that expert testimony logically advances a material aspect of the proposing party's case.
Daubert also requires a special inquiry into relevance, calling on the trial court to ensure that expert testimony "logically advances a material aspect of the proposing party's case." ... The primary focus of a Daubert inquiry is on the principles and methodology underlying expert opinion testimony, not the conclusions they generate.
CPH submits this motion on the ground that Dr. Rouhani's expert testimony fails to meet the standards for relevancy and reliability required by Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the Supreme Court's ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 594-95, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). ... In interpreting the requirements of Rule 702, the Supreme Court in Daubert established that scientific expert testimony must be both relevant and reliable to be admissible.