BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Real Property - Transactions

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Tuesday, August 20, 2024

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE webinar will provide counsel with an analysis of how courts apply the Daubert/Frye standards (and comparable state standards) to the presentation of expert testimony in construction disputes, including any impact that the recently amended Rule 702 may have on the standards' application. The panel will outline practical approaches to raise or defend a challenge to the admission of expert testimony.

Faculty

David M. Adelstein
Partner
Kirwin Norris

Mr. Adelstein represents general contractors, subcontractors, design professionals, developers, associations, suppliers, sureties, and owners in a myriad of construction matters including, without limitation, construction/design defect claims, schedule-based claims (including inefficiency, lost productivity, and acceleration claims), bid protests, payment disputes, lien and bond claims, liability and property insurance issues, and a host of other issues that affect the construction industry. He prepares and negotiates construction contracts for clients utilizing AIA, EJCDC, and AGC industry form documents, as well as contracts that are not based on an industry form document.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Patrick J. Perrone
Partner
K&L Gates, LLP

Mr. Perrone concentrates his practice on construction and product defect matters. He is an experienced trial attorney who has handled hundreds of cases involving consumer/building products and construction defects. Mr. Perrone is also an experienced class action attorney and has defended a variety of consumer/building products class action suits.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

In most construction suits, both sides rely on experts to provide opinions and testimony supporting or against claims of liability and damages. Such expert testimony often involves determining fault for design and construction defects, schedule delays, and worker inefficiency. Expert opinion and testimony impact all parties in a construction dispute, including property owners, developers, financial institutions, design professionals, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and vendors.

The Daubert/Frye ruling and the body of law on challenging expert opinions and testimony continue to evolve for construction disputes in both state and federal courts. Courts permit testing expert testimony and an expert's foundational methodology or technique to ensure that it is relevant and reliable. And the recently amended Rule 702 will impact such testing and court rulings.

Listen as our panel of construction litigators discusses the applicability of the Daubert/Frye standards to the presentation of expert testimony in construction disputes, analyzes what is required to successfully raise or defend a challenge to the admission of expert testimony, especially in light of the recently amended Rule 702, and provides guidance for using experts in construction cases.

Outline

  1. Dispositive motions in the Daubert hearing: the Daubert challenge
    1. Effect of recent Rule 702 amendments
  2. Frye standards: how they differ from Daubert standards
  3. Application to construction cases
  4. Application to scheduling, construction defects, and damages
  5. Future impact of Daubert/Frye on construction claims
  6. Lessons from court rulings

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • How can counsel effectively challenge a construction expert witness' theories and whether those theories have been tested?
  • What impact will the recent Rule 702 amendments have on expert witness challenges?
  • Under what circumstances should counsel consider not filing a Daubert/Frye motion?
  • How can counsel leverage prior rulings involving a construction expert witness?