Last week significant amendments to expert disclosure provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 took effect. Time will tell whether these amendments will have a significant effect on the way attorneys work with experts and on Daubert practice and procedure in general. read more
|
In July 2009 in Shalaby v. Newell Rubbermaid, Inc., the Southern District of California granted the defendant’s Daubert motion to exclude the testimony of the plaintiff’s causation expert, and subsequently granted summary judgment because the plaintiff could not carry his burden, imposed by California state law, to present expert testimony on causation. The plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the district court erred in excluding the evidence after finding, allegedly, that the expert’s testimony satisfied California’s Frye general acceptance standard. The Ninth Circuit would have nothing to do with that theory, and readily affirmed the district court’s ruling. The Supreme Court refused to grant certiorari, for good reason.
read more
|