Showing results 1-2 of 2.
Cases using phrasing similar to:
"Both federal and Kansas law permit the introduction of similar accidents in product liability actions to prove "notice, the existence of a defect, or to refute testimony given by a defense witness that a given product was designed without safety hazards.""
But, as the Court stated in Daubert, the test of reliability is "flexible," and Daubert's list of specific factors neither necessarily nor exclusively applies to all experts or in every case. ... At issue in the case was whether the district court properly allowed two of the plaintiffs' experts to testify under the Daubert standard.
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed
In Daubert, the Supreme Court described a trial judge's "gatekeeping role" in determining whether expert scientific testimony meets the requirements for admissibility under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. ... See 184 F.3d 1259, 1274-75 (10th Cir.1999) (framing the issue as whether the district court erred in allowing plaintiff's expert to testify about and reference various documents relied on by the expert in forming his expert opinion, and concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing this testimony), overruled on other grounds, Weisgram v. Marley Co., 528 U.S. 440, 446 n. 2, 456-57, 120 S.Ct. 1011, 145 L.Ed.2d 958 (2000).Lawn care Gardening tools Lawn mowers