Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Trial Consulting pp 137–172Cite as

The Admissibility of Expert Witness Testimony

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 989 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter describes the most important rules and principles that govern the admissibility of expert testimony. It also demonstrates ways in which trial consultants can maximize the likelihood that their own research and opinions will be admitted into evidence and suggests strategies for mounting effective attacks against the expert evidence submitted by opponents. The chapter begins with an overview of the discovery rules governing expert testimony in civil and criminal cases. It then proceeds to describe the evidentiary rules and principles that most directly affect expert witnesses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

Rules and Statutes

Cases

  • Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ames v. Van Dyne, No. 95-3376, 1996 WL 662899, at **4 (6th Cir. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Aventis Environmental Science USA LP v. Scotts Co., 383 F. Supp. 2d 488 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Black v. Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., 19 F. Supp. 2d 592, 595 (S.D. W. Va. 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt Distributing Co., Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., 247 F.3d 822 (8th Cir. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp, 207 F.3d 1039, 1055 (8th Cir. 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Diesel Machinery, Inc. v. B.R. Lee Industries, Inc., 418 F.3d 820, 837 (8th Cir. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixie Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Grove U.S., L.L.C., No. CIV-04-390-F, 2005 WL 3558663 (W.D. Okla. Dec. 29, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • EEOC v. Dial Corp., No Civ.A. 99-3356, 2002 WL 31061088 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 17, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Estes v. Moore, 993 F.2d 161, 163–64 (8th Cir. 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 787 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford v. Mercer County Correctional Center, 171 F. App’x 416, 420 (3d Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (D.C. Cir. 1923).

    Google Scholar 

  • General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen v. Deseret Book Co., 287 F.3d 936, 951–54 (10th Cir. 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsett v. University of Puerto Rico, 740 F. Supp. 921 (D.P.R. 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Micro Chemical, Inc. v. Lextron, Inc., 317 F.3d 1387, 1392 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Minebea Co., Ltd. v. Papst, 231 F.R.D. 3, 12 (D.D.C. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray v. First Marine Insurance Co., 29 F. App’x 503, 507 (10th Cir. 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nebraska Plastics, Inc. v. Holland Colors Americas, Inc., 408 F.3d 410, 415–16 (8th Cir. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz-Lopez v. Sociedade Espanola, 248 F.3d 29, 33–37 (1st Cir. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandrol USA, LP v. Airboss Railway Products, Inc., 424 F.3d 1161, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivera Pomales v. Bridgestone Firestone Inc., 217 F.R.D. 290, 291–93 (D.P.R. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts ex rel. Johnson v. Galen of Virginia, Inc., 325 F.3d 776, 781–84 (6th Cir. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders v. City of Minneapolis, No. CIV03-5817 ADM/AJB, 2005 WL 3536129, at *8 (D. Minn. Dec. 23, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwab v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 992, 1136 (E.D.N.Y. 2006), rev’d sub nom. on other grounds, McLaughlin v. American Tobacco Co., 522 F.3d 215 (5th Cir. 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinault v. Sears Logistic Services, No. 03-2309-MA/V, 2004 WL 792748 (W.D. Tenn. Feb. 11, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter v. Cedar Point Oil Co., Inc., 73 F.3d 546, 571 (5th Cir. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • State v. Brown, 836 S.W.2d 530, 549 (Tenn. 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele v. Shah, 87 F.3d 1266, 1271 (11th Cir. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Synthes Spine Co., L.P. v. Walden, No. CIV.A. 04-CV-4140, 2005 WL 3591982 (E.D. Penn. Dec. 21, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor v. Illinois, 484 U.S. 400, 408 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracinda Corp. v. DaimlerChrysler AG, 362 F. Supp. 2d 487 (D. Del. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Trigon Ins. Co. v. United States, 204 F.R.D. 277, 281–84 (E.D. Va. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Trost v. Trek Bicycle Corp., 162 F.3d 1004, 1008 (8th Cir. 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Anderson, 446 F.3d 870, 874–76 (8th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Batts, 171 F. App’x 977, 982 (4th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Beltran-Arce, 415 F.3d 949, 953–54 (8th Cir. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Campbell, 81 F. App’x 532, 535 (6th Cir. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Conroy, 424 F.3d 833, 838 & n.2 (8th Cir. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Cruz, 363 F.3d 187, 196 n.2 (2d Cir. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Dixon, 185 F.3d 393, 400 (5th Cir. 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Duvall, 272 F.3d 825, 828–29 (7th Cir. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Eff, 461 F. Supp. 2d 529 (E.D. Tex. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Figueroa-Lopez, 125 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Finley, 301 F.3d 1000, 1018 (9th Cir. 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Foote, 898 F.2d 659, 665–66 (8th Cir. 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Ganier, 468 F.3d 920, 927 (6th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Gowan, 32 F.3d 1466, 1469–70 (10th Cir. 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Jackson, 51 F.3d 646, 651 (7th Cir. 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Jasper, No. 00CR825(PKL), 2003 WL 223212, at *1, 4 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Johnson, 228 F.3d 920, 924–26 (8th Cir. 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Liner, 435 F.3d 920, 924 (8th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Mamah, 332 F.3d 475, 478 (7th Cir. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Martin, 391 F.3d 949, 954 (8th Cir. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Morales, 108 F.3d 1031, 1038 (9th Cir. 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Mull, 40 F. App’x 300, 303 (8th Cir. 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Novaton, 271 F.3d 968, 1007–08 (11th Cir. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Perkins, 470 F.3d 150, 155–56 (4th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Perry, 438 F.3d 642, 650 (6th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 223 F.R.D. 1 (D.D.C. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Red Elk, 185 F. App’x 716, 720–25 (10th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Shepard, 462 F.3d 847, 865–66 (8th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Thompson, 923 F. Supp. 144, 145–46 (S.D. Ind. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 64 n.6 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. White, 492 F.3d 380, 407 (6th Cir. 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Wintermute, 443 F.3d 993, 1001 (8th Cir. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodworker’s Supply, Inc. v. Principal Mutual Life Insurance Co., 170 F.3d 985 (10th Cir. 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Rogers Imports, Inc., 216 F. Supp. 670, (S.D.N.Y. 1963).

    Google Scholar 

Other Sources

  • Beisecker, T. D. (1994). Discovering trial consultant work product: A new way to borrow an adversary’s wits? American Journal of Trial Advocacy, 17, 581, 598–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, D. E., & Jackson, J. E. (Spring 2004). The Daubert Trilogy in the States 4 Jurimetrics Journal 351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, P. (2005). Joseph, Expert Approaches, SL044 ALI-ABA 103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppel, G. S. (2005). Toward a New Federalism in State Civil Justice: Developing a Uniform Code of State Civil Procedure through a Collaborative Rule-Making Process, 58 Vand. L. Rev. 1167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levett, L. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2008). The Effectiveness of Opposing Expert Witnesses for Educating Jurors about Unreliable Expert Evidence, 32 L. & Human Behavior 363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manual of Model Civil Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the Eighth Circuit. (May 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolfi, A. R. (2003). Why Illinois Should Abandon Frye’s General Acceptance Standard for the Admission of Novel Scientific Evidence, 78 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 861.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Nebraska/Lincoln, 238 Burnett Hall, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA

    Marc W. Pearce

Authors
  1. Marc W. Pearce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc W. Pearce .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska/Lincoln, Burnett Hall 338, Lincoln, 68588-9296, Nebraska, USA

    Richard L. Wiener

  2. Dept. Psychology, University of Nebraska, Burnett Hall 335, Lincoln, 68588-0308, Nebraska, USA

    Brian H. Bornstein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pearce, M.W. (2011). The Admissibility of Expert Witness Testimony. In: Wiener, R., Bornstein, B. (eds) Handbook of Trial Consulting. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7569-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation