Federal Rule of Evidence 702 Proposed Amendments: Bringing Expert Analysis Under Consistent Judicial Scrutiny
Course Details
- smart_display Format
On-Demand
- signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level
- work Practice Area
Personal Injury and Med Mal
- event Date
Wednesday, January 26, 2022
- schedule Time
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
- timer Program Length
90 minutes
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
This CLE webinar will review the proposed amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the split and perceived confusion among trial and appellate courts regarding the application of FRE 702, and the intended effect of the proposed changes to FRE 702, and the impact on admissibility the change to FRE 702 subsection (d) may produce.
Mr. Campbell is a partner in the firm’s Product Liability and Mass Tort practice. He has experience in all phases of litigation, including first-chairing jury and bench trials in state and federal courts and arguing appeals. He is co-author of the book Expert Witnesses: Products Liability Cases (West 2009), an in-depth guide to expert witness development in all types of product liability and mass tort matters, including pharmaceutical, toxic torts, automotive, industrial accidents and children's and consumer products.
Mr. Mickus defends manufacturers and other business interests in product liability and tort lawsuits around the country, guiding cases through the discovery, trial, and appeal stages. He has successfully tried cases to juries in Colorado, Texas, California, New York, Puerto Rico, Montana and several other states.
Professor Miller is the creator and Blog Editor of EvidenceProf Blog, which addresses recent developments in Evidence precedent, legislation, and scholarship. His areas of expertise include Evidence, Criminal Law and Procedure, and Civil Procedure.
Ms. Peters represents high-growth, closely held companies, often serving as outside general counsel. She has handled litigation matters in over thirty states, taking a proactive, integrated problem solving approach to guide her clients through the challenges that arise with rapid corporate expansion and changing markets. Ms. Peters served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of South Carolina, an Honors Attorney for the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Justice Department and a law clerk for a federal appeals court judge (Hon. Emory Sneeden, Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals), before entering private practice.
Success in complex injury cases often turns on whether expert testimony is admitted or excluded regarding the existence and extent of injury, causation, damages, apportionment of fault, and even likelihood of disease or harm.
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony. The federal judiciary's Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules has proposed amending FRE 702 in response to perceived misunderstanding by trial courts of what the rule means and how to apply it. The amendments will expressly state the proponent's burden of proof and focus more attention on the reliability of an expert's final opinion as a function of the methodology applied to the facts of the case.
The program will review the difference between requirements for admissibility of evidence and those factors that go to the weight of the evidence. The program will also explore what it means to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the expert's testimony is based on "sufficient facts or data" or that it is "more likely than not" that the "expert's opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case."
Listen as this experienced panel reviews the proposed amendments to FRE 702 and their practical consequences.
- How did we get to the point where an amendment is on the table?
- Weight v. Admissibility issue
- Burden of production issue
- Overstatement issue
- What are the proposed amendments under consideration and where are we in the process?
- Proposed amendment published on July 29, 2021, for public comment and hearing
- Amendment to address weight v. admissibility and preponderance of evidence issue
- Overstatement issue
- Next stages of the process
- Possible complications of SCOTUS cases
- What are the expected effects of the amendment if it is enacted?
- Weight v. admissibility & preponderance issues
- Overstatement issue
- Overall effects
The panel will review these and other pivotal issues:
- If the amendments are intended to clarify the rule, are courts required to change how they rule?
- On appeal, will the trial court's decision get more scrutiny?
- Are there any possible unintended or adverse consequences of the amendments?
- How will the amendments change objections to expert testimony?
