BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack
BarbriPdBannerMessage

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Personal Injury and Med Mal

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Monday, September 29, 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

$197.00

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

R. Chris Barden
National Expert in Science, Clinical Psychology, and Law
RC Barden and Associates

Dr. Barden is a national expert in law and science. He is a licensed attorney, licensed psychologist, research scientist, speaker, writer, expert witness, and national science-litigation-legislation consultant. Dr. Barden has published in the leading journals and texts in law, public policy, child-social-clinical psychology, psychiatry, surgery, and pediatrics. He has helped draft and enact legislation to reform and improve the Emergency Medical System for Children in the U.S. As an attorney, Dr. Barden’s clients have received record jury verdicts and record settlements in complex litigation to reform the U.S. mental health system. As a national expert in law, science, and systems reform he has been interviewed by many national and international media sources. Dr. Barden has given invited national training addresses to the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Bar Association, the U.S. Surgeon General's Conference, the International Assn of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, F.B.I. regional training meetings, and other groups. He has also served as a member of a State Higher Education Coordinating Board (MN), a member of a State Licensing Board of Psychology (MN), and as a State Special Assistant Attorney General (UT).  

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?