Daubert standard

In United States federal law, the '''''Daubert'' standard is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony. A party may raise a ''Daubert'' motion''', a special motion ''in limine'' raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury. The '''''Daubert'' trilogy''' are the three United States Supreme Court cases that articulated the ''Daubert'' standard:

*''Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'' (1993), which held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence did not incorporate the ''Frye'' standard as a basis for assessing the admissibility of scientific expert testimony, but that the rule incorporated a flexible reliability standard instead; *''General Electric Co. v. Joiner'' (1997), which held that a district court judge may exclude expert testimony when there are gaps between the evidence relied on by an expert and that person's conclusion, and that an abuse-of-discretion standard of review is the proper standard for appellate courts to use in reviewing a trial court's decision of whether it should admit expert testimony; *''Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael'' (1999), which held that the judge's gatekeeping function identified in ''Daubert'' applies to all expert testimony, including that which is non-scientific.

Important appellate-level opinions that clarify the standard include Judge Alex Kozinski's opinion in Daubert on remand, and Judge Edward Becker's opinion. Provided by Wikipedia