Court will exclude defective damages evidence

Article Abstract:

Attorneys must prepare expert evidence with care to ensure admissibility after the 1993 Supreme Court ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmacuticals. The expert evidence is usually a critical part of the damages case in patent suits, because damages issues are usally complex and can best be shown through such evidence. Common arguments to try and exclude such evidence are not following the standards for complete evidentiary disclosure of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) or not showing one of the trial's issues of fact.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code:

Science and courts still struggle to cooperate

Article Abstract:

The Daubert case did more than establish a new standard for the admission of expert testimony. It advocated the use of summary judgment and other such judicial management tools to exclude speculative evidence, and keeping to this model could enhance public confidence in the courts. Scientific analysis should determine causality, not observation. General Electric v. Joiner, a case in which the Supreme Court has granted certiorari, raises this issue.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code:

Expert witness; libel experts

Article Abstract:

The proliferation of expert witnesses in public-figure libel cases despite universal judicial disapproval of this practice in the past decade is discussed. The Libel Defense Resource Center has accumulated background on more than 100 people who have testified in such cases or are prepared to do so. Various cases are discussed.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

Comment:  (50-4000 characters)

Name:

E-mail:

Security Code: