Daubert Standard

Daubert Standard

Daubert Standard

The Daubert standard governs the admissibility of expert testimony in federal court and in most states. It directs the trial judge to assess whether the expert's reasoning and methodology are scientifically valid and properly applied, considering factors such as testability, peer review, known error rates, standards controlling the technique, and general acceptance.

The December 2023 amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 clarified that the proponent must establish admissibility by a preponderance of the evidence, and that the expert's opinion must reflect a reliable application of the methodology to the facts of the case.

Alternative Names:

Daubert Test

Why it Matters?

In product liability, toxic tort, and medical malpractice defense, a successful Daubert motion frequently ends the case, because plaintiffs cannot prove causation without expert testimony. Motion practice is therefore concentrated at the expert phase, and the record built during expert depositions is what makes or breaks the challenge.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Daubert and Frye?

What is the difference between Daubert and Frye?

Daubert requires the judge to evaluate the reliability of the methodology using multiple factors. Frye asks only whether the technique is generally accepted in the relevant field. Frye is generally considered easier for well-established methods and harder for novel ones.

Did the 2023 amendment to Rule 702 change the standard?

Did the 2023 amendment to Rule 702 change the standard?

It clarified rather than changed it. The amendment emphasizes that the proponent bears the burden by a preponderance of the evidence and that reliable application to the case facts is an admissibility question, not a weight question.

When should a Daubert motion be filed?