BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack
BarbriPdBannerMessage

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    Live Online with Live Q&A

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Personal Injury and Med Mal

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Thursday, September 11, 2025

  • 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.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

Early Bird Pricing!
MSRP
$197.00
$167.45
Save $29.55

Discount expires 9/5/25

This course is $0 with these passes:

CLE
ALL

This CLE webinar will discuss expert evidence related to "repressed" or "recovered" memories in sexual abuse litigation, specifically focusing on admissibility contests under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Daubert, and parallel state rules. The discussion will include Cohen v. Cohen, 125 F.4th 454 (3d Cir. 2025), which offers the first in-depth circuit court analysis of repressed memory theory under FRE 702 and provides detailed guidance on how opinions of any experts regardless of subject matter ought to be analyzed before being admitted into evidence. 

Faculty

Kiersty DeGroote
Attorney
Bochetto/Lentz, PC

Ms. DeGroote's practice focuses on complex matters related to personal injury, employment law, and general commercial disputes. She represents individuals and businesses at all stages of litigation to ensure her clients receive the best possible recovery whether that be through settlement, arbitration, or trial.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

It is no longer unusual for abuse claims to be lodged long after the alleged acts occurred. Although many states have lengthened or temporarily reopened the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse, it is still not unusual for plaintiffs to assert claims based on alleged "recovered" or "repressed" memories. This theory has been particularly controversial because of the possibility of counselors creating false memories.

The stakes in these kinds of cases are extremely high, with no margin for error. Attorneys bringing or defending abuse cases grounded in recovered memories—which may not be limited to sexual abuse—need to understand this exceedingly difficult and complicated subject in detail. 

In Cohen v. Cohen, the Third Circuit was confronted with a childhood sexual abuse case based on recovered memories. It reviewed how the district court should have analyzed the admissibility of the plaintiff's expert's opinion, specifically focusing on the requirements of FRE 702 and what happens when both sides present expert testimony. Cohen offers an in-depth analysis of the "recovered" memory theory and its experts, but more significantly sheds light on the nuances of FRE 702 and dueling experts that can be applied in any type of case.

Listen as this distinguished panel discusses expert evidence related to "repressed" or "recovered" memories and the lessons from Cohen that are applicable to any case involving experts and especially dueling experts. 

Outline

I. Repressed memory theory

II. Applying FRE 702 analysis to repressed memory theory

III. Lessons from Cohen


Benefits

The panel will review these and other important questions:

  • Is it repression or recovery of memories that is more controversial?
  • What is an individualized Daubert analysis?
  • How should courts assess studies under Rule 702?