Expert witnesses can aid jurors in understanding complex issues, and they often significantly impact the success or failure of a case. Litigators preparing to qualify or challenge an expert witness must be ready to navigate several obstacles in admitting or excluding expert testimony. With the new amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 coming into effect, litigators should take note of changes and incorporate them into their decision-making regarding expert testimony.

‘Frye,’ ‘Daubert’ and Federal Rule of Evidence 702

Federal Rule of Evidence 702 controls who can testify as an expert witness in federal court and how these experts are qualified. FRE 702 affects the admissibility, not merely the weight of the evidence. Before Daubert, courts followed the Frye standard, under which scientific evidence could be admitted only if it had enjoyed “general acceptance” in the relevant scientific community. See Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). The Supreme Court’s Daubert decision shifted some of the responsibility for evaluating the reliability of an expert’s testimony to the trial judge, charging them with acting as “gatekeepers” to exclude unreliable expert testimony from the courtroom. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).