{"id":5893,"date":"2011-11-03T13:58:53","date_gmt":"2011-11-03T19:58:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.textrial.com\/experts-travel-motion-limine-knowing-daubert-history\/"},"modified":"2011-11-03T13:58:53","modified_gmt":"2011-11-03T19:58:53","slug":"experts-travel-motion-limine-knowing-daubert-history","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.textrial.com\/es\/experts-travel-motion-limine-knowing-daubert-history\/","title":{"rendered":"Experts Who Travel With Their Own Motion In Limine: Knowing The Daubert History"},"content":{"rendered":"
    \n
  1. Scope of Paper<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Expert witnesses have histories.\u00a0 Knowledge of the experts\u2019 history and track record with regard to Daubert<\/em> challenges and other motions to exclude can be important in the decision to retain an expert and the approach to use when challenging the other side\u2019s expert (or defending your own).\u00a0 This paper outlines some of the areas which may be fruitful for this sort of research.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Daubert<\/em> History – Generally<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
        \n
      1. Positive Treatments<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        It is possible to find opinions in which experts\u2019 methods and credentials have been explicitly approved, if not praised, by various courts.\u00a0 All things being equal, these are the sorts of experts who should be retained.\u00a0 What could be better than having an expert who was described as \u201cundoubtedly qualified\u201d as described in Cross v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc.<\/em>, 2011 WL 3498305 (M.D. Fla. 2011)?\u00a0 This was the defendant\u2019s expert whose testimony the judge described as, \u201chelpful, reliable, and supported by [his] extensive education and experience in the relevant field of medicine.\u201d\u00a0 Another example is Columbia Health Services of El Paso, Inc. v. Columbia-HCA Healthcare Corp.<\/em>, 1996 WL 812934 (W.D. Tex.) in which the expert economist was found to have \u201cimpeccable credentials.\u201d<\/p>\n

        These experts are out there and can be retained.\u00a0 Consider seining Westlaw, Lexus and other legal search sites for opinions which explicitly approve a particular expert witness.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Negative Comments<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Some courts\u2019 comments are not as charitable toward expert witnesses.\u00a0 You may want to think twice before retaining an expert whose opinions have been characterized as \u201cunpublished, unverified . . . untested . . . not supported by any analysis which the trial court can identify as scientific.\u201d\u00a0 Demaree v. Toyota Motor Corp<\/em>., 37 F. Supp. 959 (W.D. Ky. 1999).\u00a0 Another expert\u2019s opinions were excluded as being \u201cunsupported, unscientific\u201d and \u201cpure speculation.\u201d\u00a0 Abarca v. Franklin County Water District<\/em>, ____ S.W.2d ____, 2011 WL 3875414 (E.D. Cal. 2011).<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. The Court\u2019s History<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            While not squarely within the scope of this paper, remember to look at the court\u2019s history in dealing with various Daubert<\/em> challenges.\u00a0 It is possible, but not likely, that the court has actually passed on the qualifications and methodology of the expert in question.\u00a0 It would be very helpful to find that information and know whether this judge tends to favor or disfavor a particular expert witness.<\/p>\n

            Active trial courts deal with Daubert<\/em> challenges on a regular basis.\u00a0 With the easy access to electronic dockets and local list servers, you may be able to identify and observe a Daubert<\/em> hearing in front of your particular judge.\u00a0 By doing so, you can quickly identify and highlight many of the areas which a judge may be looking at when making her decision on other expert witnesses.\u00a0 Courts frequently have routines for dealing with routine expert witnesses. It is fair to assume that the judge has her own pattern or practice when dealing with routine witnesses such as economists, treating physicians or appraisers.\u00a0 Knowing a particular court\u2019s likes and dislikes when it comes to expert witnesses can be very helpful.<\/p>\n

            You may also want to consider hiring the expert witness who the judge\u2019s old firm used in a similar case.<\/p>\n

            Download and read the entire publication here.<\/a><\/h2>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

            Scope of Paper Expert witnesses have histories.\u00a0 Knowledge of the experts\u2019 history and track record with regard to Daubert challenges and other motions to exclude can be important in the decision to retain an expert and the approach to use when challenging the other side\u2019s expert (or defending your own).\u00a0 This paper outlines some of
            LEER M\u00c1S<\/a><\/p>\n

            <\/div>
            <\/div>