The phrase describes the common situation where each side presents credentialed experts offering contradictory opinions, leaving the factfinder to choose between them.
Courts frequently decline to resolve such disputes on admissibility grounds.
Alternative Names:
Dueling Experts, Competing Expert Testimony
Why it Matters?
The phrase is often invoked to argue that a Daubert challenge should be denied because competing opinions present a jury question, and the 2023 Rule 702 amendment was adopted partly to address that reasoning. Where one expert's methodology is genuinely unreliable, the existence of an opposing expert does not make it admissible. Distinguishing a reliability defect from a disagreement between sound methodologies is what the motion must establish.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Does competing expert testimony defeat a Daubert motion?
What must the motion establish?
