Glossary · Evidence
Daubert Standard
The federal evidentiary test, from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), that requires expert testimony to be both relevant and reliable, with the trial judge serving as gatekeeper.
Also known as: Daubert test, Daubert challenge, Daubert motion, Federal Rule 702
What it is
The Daubert standard is the federal evidentiary test for the admissibility of expert testimony, established by the Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and codified in Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Under Daubert, the trial judge serves as a gatekeeper and must ensure that proffered expert testimony is both relevant and reliable before it reaches the jury.
The reliability factors
Daubert identified non-exhaustive factors for assessing reliability: whether the underlying theory or technique can be (and has been) tested, whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication, the known or potential error rate, the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation, and whether it has achieved general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. Trial judges have wide discretion in applying these factors.
Daubert vs. Frye
Daubert displaced the older Frye standard (general acceptance test) in federal court and in most states. A minority of states still apply Frye or hybrid tests. Knowing which standard governs in the venue is foundational to expert preparation and challenge strategy.
Why it matters in malpractice
Malpractice cases live or die on expert testimony. A well-prepared Daubert challenge can exclude an opposing expert and force a settlement; a successfully-defended Daubert motion sets the case up for trial with the expert intact. Causation experts in particular face heavy Daubert scrutiny, especially in cases involving novel theories of injury or contested epidemiology.
In settlement strategy
The outcome of pre-trial Daubert motions is often the inflection point in case value. Build expert files with admissibility in mind from the first retention.
See Also
- Expert Witness — A qualified specialist retained to give opinion testimony on issues requiring specialized knowledge, indispensable in medical malpractice for establishing the standard of care, breach, and causation.
- Standard of Care — The level of skill, diligence, and judgment a reasonably competent practitioner in the same specialty would exercise under similar circumstances, used as the benchmark for proving negligence in a malpractice case.